Coffee Time on ZKS found that the "by knife" attribution on the car door was released in the December 14th 1969 edition of the Dayton Daily News. But I’m not aware of any full image of the word "knife" being released. So that said, the ability to copy it is unlikely. I always believed the Fairfield letters genuine for too many reasons to mention, but just looking at letters and deciding "it doesn’t look like Zodiac" or "it does look like Zodiac" is not one of those ways. Quote: "While not all courts have explained their reasoning, those that do tend to draw a distinction between the practice of identifying similarities and differences in handwriting characteristics and the act of drawing a definitive conclusion about identity therefrom". In a nutshell, handwriting comparisons or identifying authenticity to an individual is a supplementary and useful tool, but cannot alone determine whether letters were written by Zodiac or not. In the absence of DNA and fingerprints, law enforcement have decided upon the authenticity of Zodiac communications or not, by the use of documents examiners. But their analysis is educated, subjective, but not conclusive, hence why handwriting alone could never convict an individual such as Zodiac. Therefore, determining authenticity of the Zodiac communications cannot rely solely on this process. As such, compiling a list and determining that everything outside this list should be dismissed as non-authentic is not realistic.

The recent solving of the 340 has gone a long way to further confirming the Z38 communication, and by extension, the December 16th 1969 letter. Here is what I placed on Reddit: "The Dec 7 letter stated " I just need help". Then, 13 days later the Belli letter followed in the same tone, asking for help 4 times. The Belli author couldn’t have copied the Dec 7 letter, so we’d have to assume it’s coincidence based on two separate author’s reciting and mocking the Dunbar phone call from about seven weeks ago. The letters do have a juvenile quality, but how easy would it be for a hoaxer to deliver a neat and tidy cipher copied from the newspapers. Extremely easy. Yet here, the author makes no effort to convince. A hoaxer could and should have easily achieved this, if he wanted to mimic what had gone before. The Zodiac Killer didn’t need to convince anyone, because he was Zodiac.

What is interesting about ZODAIK on the final line of the 340, is the author of the Dec 7 letter separated ZO∆AIKꞮ+ into AIKꞮ+. As Druzer stated "The most curious/compelling feats are that the author isolated actual words, most notably death, and that he refrained from copying Zodaik, which would certainly be expected of a hoaxer". The Z38 author separated ZO∆AIKꞮ+ into AIKꞮ+, and placed it at the end of the Z38. We now know, because the 340 has just been solved, that AIKꞮ+ deciphers to DEATH. That means the Z38 author placed DEATH at the end of the Dec 7 cipher, just like the Zodiac Killer did in the 340 cipher. Couple this with "I just need help", and the coincidences for me don’t wash anymore".

I understand people have differing opinions on the validity of the Zodiac letters, and don’t expect everybody to agree that the Fairfield letters are genuine (or any other communications for that matter), but if I believe they are 100% genuine, that is what I will state and reason for, despite what the "broken record" keeps saying.

There are several communications that have beyond any reasonable doubt been shown to be genuine Zodiac communications, such as the Fairfield letters and Monticello card.

I’ve seen the Monticello card up close and in person. Have you? I take it no. Yet you are "authenticating" it sight unseen. Come on man.

In a nutshell, handwriting comparisons or identifying authenticity to an individual is a supplementary and useful tool, but cannot alone determine whether letters were written by Zodiac or not. In the absence of DNA and fingerprints, law enforcement have decided upon the authenticity of Zodiac communications or not, by the use of documents examiners. But their analysis is educated, subjective, but not conclusive, hence why handwriting alone could never convict an individual such as Zodiac. Therefore, determining authenticity of the Zodiac communications cannot rely solely on this process. As such, compiling a list and determining that everything outside this list should be dismissed as non-authentic is not realistic.

That’s about the sum of it. But I don’t see Tom putting undue emphasis on handwriting, not that I think you’re imply that, I just think it bears mentioning that as regard handwriting, most of respected Z researchers seem to be in agreement.

I’m not sure we should be evoking "reasonable doubt". Conviction is one thing, but we’re not operating on that level of information.

but how easy would it be for a hoaxer to deliver a neat and tidy cipher copied from the newspapers. Extremely easy. Yet here, the author makes no effort to convince. A hoaxer could and should have easily achieved this, if he wanted to mimic what had gone before. The Zodiac Killer didn’t need to convince anyone, because he was Zodiac.

I don’t know how I feel about this argument. It’s a bit… well… I just don’t know. It seems to me that there is nothing to prevent a hoaxer making a messy cipher, and there is nothing to prevent the Zodiac from making a messy cipher. You argue for a motivation, but I see nothing that would compel either the hoaxer, or the Zodiac. All I can say of it is that it is no great obstacle to either conclusion.

I’ve seen the Monticello card up close and in person. Have you? I take it no. Yet you are "authenticating" it sight unseen. Come on man.

I respect experience. There’s something to be said for getting in amongst it. Logic is fine, but humans soak up information from immersion. I put quite a bit of stock in people who have a real "feel" for the case. However, this statement doesn’t do anything to refute Richard’s arguments.

I think Richard’s arguments are really quite reasonable. Am I convinced? I don’t know.

I should probably take this to another thread, but it applies to Zodiac letters in general, so I’ll flog this point one last time.

As a disclaimer I want to say, I’m no expert and this is speculation:

Please indulge me in a little tactile thought experiment. This is in the spirit of Tom having seen, and touched evidence. Imagine you’re making a birthday card for your mum. I want you to get out a big ‘ol piece of card paper, some bright colour; get out posca pens, bust out the macaroni and glitter and just get creative. Now the first thing I want you to do is draw a nice big illustration, right in the middle of the card, something "off the wall", something creative. Now get out that big ol’ sharpie, the real thick one, and I want you to write the words "Happy Birthday" in big letters. Now stop. How did you write that? Did you "handwrite" it? Maybe, if you’re some dried up old bureaucrat, but I’m going to bet you "drew" it.

Now imagine you’re in high school again and you’re standing in front of your principal’s car with a big fat sharpie. Are you going to write something on it? Are you going to show off your fine penmanship? No. You’re going to draw all over that sucker.

Now, maybe that’s all B.S. Maybe making this distinction between handwriting and drawing is nonsense. I don’t think it is. I don’t think text that accompanies an illustration can rightly be called "handwriting" in the typical sense. Nor do I believe that text found in graffiti can be rightly called "handwriting". But I’m not even asking you to believe in a major distinction, I’m just asking how it is that both the Zodiac and the Hoaxer "drew" "Knife" in such a strikingly similar manner?

If you held a gun to my head, I’d say the mostly likely explanation is that somewhere out there is a newspaper with a photo of that car door and the hoaxer just copied that. But I can’t easily accept the similarity as random chance.

I don’t believe anybody can just look at a communication, particularly nth reproduction, or a pasted card such as the Pines, 13-Hole or Monticello, and declare them genuine or otherwise. These cards have to be examined as to their content and relationship to other confirmed and unconfirmed communications. The wording on the Monticello card (in my opinion only) not only tells you the victim, but reveals the location of Monticello with respect to the events in 1969 & 1971, and its connection to the Dripping Pen card. Irrespective of whether anybody buys this or not, it’s imperative to analyse the wording and context of a card, not what it may look like if it was released. It would help if the DMV, Monticello card (or Novato communication) were available to view, because knowing their full visible content would be extremely useful, but not always essential.

In terms of the "Bleeding Knife", I don’t believe it’s a hoaxer, primarily because of the 340 solution suggesting it isn’t (as explained above), so I don’t think the handwriting comparison is necessary. Handwriting comparisons are certainly helpful in combination with other corroborating material, but certainly, as you suggest, shouldn’t be relied upon as the determining factor. The Novato letter is currently undetermined, unless of course somebody finds a compelling link to a confirmed communication, or discovers that Eureka moment for the author’s choice of time.

As mentioned above, I did find "by knife" in a few out-of-state newspapers, but not a picture of it. I’m not sure that it’s necessary, because handwriting samples were out in the wild already. All you really need are the 3-stroke "k" and the fancy "f."

(Also, am I going blind, or did the author not dot the i’s?)

Is the Department of Motor vehikles letter ever going to be released?

Letters can only really be included / excluded if and when zodiac is found, its like the suspected zodiac murders, its interesting if true keep it in mind and see what happens.

The article from June 30, 1972, is actually an excellent find (Morf). For a second, let’s assume the letter to be authentic:

The letter had been sent to the sports editor of the Novato Advance, Edward J Salmina. This could have happened because of any sport event with Salmina commenting on it. If Z wasn’t happy about how Edward J Salmina had reported, Edward could have become a ‘target’ for him. So far, not very spectacular. But now comes the interesting part: Z referred to Salmina leaving his house no later than some specific time (which could have been a sport result, btw). But that’s all speculation.

What is interesting, however, is that Z had referred to Salmina leaving his house. Why on earth should he do that? There is absolutely no need to refer to somebody ‘leaving the house’, isn’t there? Only one reason why somebody would refer to ‘leaving’ a house instead of simply letting him know to stay at home? Or not go to work? Or not to go on the street? Instead, it appears as if the author of the letter had actually known where Salmina had lived and used such phrase because he had seen him previously when he had left his house.

What, for example would have happened if Salmina had lived in an apartmnet in San Francisco? In such case, it would not have been his house but rather his apartment? Or if he had lived on a farm type of building or a trailer? Nope. The author very clearly was aware that Salmina had lived in a house (and that it was his). Most likely because he had watched him leaving it – at least once (‘friend’, neighbor?).

Two other cases are related to Novato:

Teresa Jean Matthews 19 female Sacramento Nurse aide in the Parkway Convalescent Hospital where her mother worked, too. Lived at 1508 Hill Road, Apt. 6, Novato. Her nude body was found on the levee north of Bryte Saturday afternoon. The body was found about 3 p.m. on March 10, on the levee near River Road by a person collecting cans. The site is about one and a half miles north of Bryte Weir. Matthews, from Novato, was identified through fingerprints. She apparently died of strangulation and when found was completely nude. No trace of her clothing or the green knapsack she was known to be carrying have been found. She was found by a man looking for aluminum cans and deputies estimate she had been dead between 24 and 48 hours. Matthew’s mother said she last heard from the young woman March 5 when she was reportedly in the Los Angeles area. She also said she was a veteran hitch-hiker. Teresa Jeans where-abouts since then remain unknown. Date of death estimated, however sometime around 8th and 9th of March, 1979. 05.03.1979

Not very Z like but she worked just down the street, close to Salmina

Nancy Patricia Gidley 24 female Was engaged and told friends and family that she was coming to San Francisco for a wedding and that she was to be maid of honor at the nuptials last Saturday for a Jennie McKenzie, who she said was the sister of her own fiancee, Kerry. However, no marriage license was issued to anyone by the name of McKenzie and did the Chronicle never hear of her before. Other sources (Chronicle 19-07-1973) mention that she´d written to her parents on 08.06.1973 that she was going to San Francisco to be maid of honor at the wedding of Collette Mrozek, of Novato, who she had met at Hamilton AFB. Collette Mrozek mentioned that she wouldn´t marry at all and had not seen Miss Gidley for months. San Francisco Nurse (X-Ray technician, from Mountain Home, Idaho). Due to her aunt, Nancy had come to San Francisco to attend the wedding of a friend. Seen last alive on Thursday when checking in her hotel room at Rodeway Inn Motel at 895 Leary Street (?). 14.07.1973

QT

There is another thread with a picture of Salmina, too:
viewtopic.php?f=69&t=3349&p=52526&hilit=salmina#p52526

I’m not sure. It seems just as natural a thing to say as "go to work". Where I’m from people would often casually refer to "leaving the house", regardless of whether, or not it was in fact a house, or an apartment, or a tent. Then again people in the US might be a bit more pedantic. Where I’m from we have a reputation of being so excessively casual that we rarely bother to finishing complete words.

Still, if we look at it as hoax letter where the writer has a personal gripe, it may in some respects make more sense for them to know where the victim lives. The whole thing seems very much a side line for Zodiac and the idea of a hoaxer using his name to get back at someone does have a certain appeal.

This letter would have to rank pretty low in terms of probability. Although it still depends a lot on just how many letters were actually received. If there was an avalanche of hoaxes, well this letter would barely rise above the rest, but if in reality hoax letters were few and far between, the overall odds would rise.

True. It contained a cipher, at least. Too bad we can’t have a look at it. Same with the Equinox being a hoax.

QT

According to Toschi, there were numerous hoax letters. Generally speaking, if some aspect of an otherwise dubious-looking letter prevented LE from disregarding it (example: Fairfield knife drawing), it would eventually end up with the FBI, and — I could be wrong — I don’t remember this one being in the FBI files (and I skimmed the thread and saw no references to such). If that’s the case, chances are that it just wasn’t taken seriously.

TomVoigt said;
"I’ve seen the Monticello card up close and in person."
viewtopic.php?f=78&t=1969&start=40#p84521

Sarcasm?
If no, do you intend to relate when & which authority has/had possession of it at
that time, and what elements you saw on the card (‘letters pasted on picture’) –
what other letters, what picture ?

TomVoigt said;
"I’ve seen the Monticello card up close and in person."
http://www.zodiackillersite.com/viewtop … =40#p84521

Sarcasm?

In late 1998 I saw it in San Francisco at the Hall Of Justice, Lt. Bruton had the Zodiac case at the time and he showed me the murder book and made copies of all of the Zodiac letters I wanted; that’s how they got on the Internet. I also looked through the hoax letters, which is what the Monticello card was considered. The card included zero handwriting, zero piece of Stine’s shirt, and zero way to possibly authenticate it. It’s as relevant to the Zodiac case as some gravy packet you might find on the ground.

I’m curious. Aside from, the pasted words, did the Monticello card contain an image of "any" kind?

Soze

TomVoigt
Perhaps sometime you could do a rough rendering from memory of what you saw, with
the obviously known words/number in their approximate places (and any additional words
included on the picture, or as ‘X’s’ if any additional words present can’t be remembered).
Also any unusual elements, such as hole(s) punched in the picture, power poles, trees,
curvey roads…
Cheers

e.g.; https://ctl.s6img.com/society6/img/YlJ- … prints.jpg

There was nothing memorable about it, it was just a vague hoax letter. There was a whole collection of hoaxes, as one might expect.