By August 1978 the letter that Det. Toschi was accused of writing was declared a fake by three document examiners, Sherwood Morrill was the only one to insist that the letter was truly from Zodiac.
Note in the article the part about the size of the April 1978 letter and envelope being different from the other letters.
Bump!
Thanks–this is the one where Morrill was pretty peeved at the S.F.P.D.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
Wow. Morrill was wrong on this letter! That must mean he was 100% wrong on everything else!
Wow. Morrill was wrong on this letter! That must mean he was 100% wrong on everything else!
Nobody said that but, SFPD did go back and rechecked 15 of the letters that Morrill had previously confirmed as it says in the article. We are not in the habit of making things up or pulling things out of our rear-ends for giggles and grins! Sourcing is key, opinions, not so much.
I just shows that handwriting isn’t as solid as other forensic science such as DNA and fingerprints. People can and do make mistakes.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
I just shows that handwriting isn’t as solid as other forensic science such as DNA and fingerprints. People can and do make mistakes.
Yes. And it’s also worth to remind oneself that handwriting/printing analysis had a different status back when the Z case was warm.
The views reflected in some of the documents we have access to are antiquated, to put it bluntly. The significance attached to printing samples (as a tool for clearing suspects, for instance) is striking – and at odds with modern practices and views.
That doesn’t mean we should ignore handwriting – we simply can’t, it plays too big a part in this puzzle. But we shouldn’t treat any known conclusions (whether they’re Morrill’s or Shimoda’s or anyone else’s) as scientific facts. They simply aren’t.
As I keep saying, with the majority of Z’s confirmed letters there are factors in play besides the printing alone. There would be good reasons to conclude these letters are genuine even if they had been typewritten. Other communications are far more problematic in that regard.
Wow. Morrill was wrong on this letter! That must mean he was 100% wrong on everything else!
Nobody said that but, SFPD did go back and rechecked 15 of the letters that Morrill had previously confirmed as it says in the article. We are not in the habit of making things up or pulling things out of our rear-ends for giggles and grins! Sourcing is key, opinions, not so much.
I want to clarify my post a bit. After re-reading it this morning I realized I may have offended about 75% of this forum, which was not my intension. Instead of saying "Sourcing is key, opinions, not so much." I should have said "opinions stated as fact, not so much."
Everyone’s opinion is welcome providing that you convey in some way that what you are stating is an opinion. ie: I think, I believe, IMO, IMHO etc.
Sorry if I offended anyone.
I just shows that handwriting isn’t as solid as other forensic science such as DNA and fingerprints. People can and do make mistakes.
Yes. And it’s also worth to remind oneself that handwriting/printing analysis had a different status back when the Z case was warm.
The views reflected in some of the documents we have access to are antiquated, to put it bluntly. The significance attached to printing samples (as a tool for clearing suspects, for instance) is striking – and at odds with modern practices and views.
That doesn’t mean we should ignore handwriting – we simply can’t, it plays too big a part in this puzzle. But we shouldn’t treat any known conclusions (whether they’re Morrill’s or Shimoda’s or anyone else’s) as scientific facts. They simply aren’t.
As I keep saying, with the majority of Z’s confirmed letters there are factors in play besides the printing alone. There would be good reasons to conclude these letters are genuine even if they had been typewritten. Other communications are far more problematic in that regard.
That’s a great overview of the writing saga Norse.. You have a way of summarizing these things. Modern forensic writing analysis has its own problems in the court room when you have two opposing experts.
An example of handwriting drama unfolded in the Jon bonnet Ramsey case.. That is a very interesting read for those of you with an opinion on this topic..
You would not want to hang someone because of a handwriting analysts opinion.
I agree Mr lowe. It can be an added bonus, but I wouldn’t stake a case on it.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
Why would Toschi, an inspector on the Zodiac case, send a fake letter crediting himself when he would have known, as the reputed forger, his letter would be determined inauthentic?
The only motive one could guess is Toschi wanted to get canned from the investigation, or fired outright.
You have to wonder if people actually think about things before they do them, and I’m not talking about Toschi.
Wow. Morrill was wrong on this letter! That must mean he was 100% wrong on everything else!
No, it just means he was human and fallible and therefore prone to mistakes and idiosyncratic biases like all the rest of us.
By August 1978 the letter that Det. Toschi was accused of writing was declared a fake by three document examiners, Sherwood Morrill was the only one to insist that the letter was truly from Zodiac.
Note in the article the part about the size of the April 1978 letter and envelope being different from the other letters.
Shimoda was the "first" to call it a genuine Z letter, seems he’s is as unreliable as Morrill 
Kidding
There is more than one way to lose your life to a killer
http://www.zodiackillersite.com/
http://zodiackillersite.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/Morf13ZKS
By August 1978 the letter that Det. Toschi was accused of writing was declared a fake by three document examiners, Sherwood Morrill was the only one to insist that the letter was truly from Zodiac.
Note in the article the part about the size of the April 1978 letter and envelope being different from the other letters.
Shimoda was the "first" to call it a genuine Z letter, seems he’s is as unreliable as Morrill
He was morf. These guys do/did the best they can, including Morrill. Shimoda isn’t above Morrill when it comes to the same scrutiny.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
Very true. Shimoda isn’t any more infallible than Morrill – or whatshisname, the LAPD expert. They’re all experts in a field which is too subjective at the end of the day to be called a science.
Anyway, what we do know is that Shimoda examined a photocopy for thirty minutes – said it was Z. Then, on closer scrutiny, he realized it was a fake. Morrill, on the other hand, refused to examine the original – and refused to change his opinion. That’s the difference between the pair of them in this context – not that Shimoda is a “better” analyst, but that Morrill seems too stubborn for his own good – whatever the reason for that stubbornness may be.
