Bait?
It is an open question.
——————————–
I don’t believe in monsters.
ALA was a game player. After the cops came calling the first time, and he knew they were interested in him as a Zodiac suspect, he began playing mind games with people he knew – and the cops too.
The likeliest explanation is that Cheney was mistaken (or lying) about the dates. ALA had been talking about killing people, referenced "The Most Dangerous Game", all that – sure. He was that kind of guy – some people are, they like to talk about morbid subjects and make themselves out to be more sinister than they actually are.
The details, however, will have to be explained thus:
1) ALA fed Cheney some explicit Zodiac related nonsense after he had been interviewed by the cops, and Cheney (honestly) got things mixed up a couple of years later.
or
2) Cheney was being a bit creative when he told his story to the MBPD.
Have to be explained thus, I say – because otherwise ALA was Zodiac, there can be no question about it.
I remember reading years ago on Tom’s that Allen was turned into police by his neighbor because he got into a fight with him about his dog barking too much. I can’t confirm that to be true, or the reason that he was investigated by Det. Lynch, but that makes sense to me.
OP is getting info fuzzy here. You keep saying that someone called the police about ALA because he had a knife. That is pure imagination.
Fact: AFTER Cheney had informed on Allen and he was interviewed as a Zodiac suspect, Det. Lynch said that he had previously interviewed Allen. He did not remember why or when, and he did not file a report on it, so there is no way to know.
Also Cheney said that it was some other murder that was NOT Zodiac and had nothing to do with Allen that reminded him of what Allen had said about Zodiac years before, instead of the current news reports on Zodiac sparking his memory.
Fact: Allen himself volunteered that he had talked to a police officer. He said that he had knives, plural, in his car, and that he was going to go to Lake B, but changed his mind, and that it wasn’t on the day of the murder. There is no way to corroborate that information, and no one else did corroborate it.
People like the OP and Graysmith like to change that to one knife, and say that he was definitely at the lake on the day of the murder, even though that is not what Allen said and there is no proof that it even happened at all.
I completely agree with you 100%. Also your use of the word Fact inspired me to make a meme. Hope you enjoy.
My point was that IF all that stuff about the knife was true, then that would indeed be suspicious, but the problem is that we have no way of knowing what is true or what isn’t. It seems to me that it is very possible that ALA made the whole thing up, because the whole interview was him dropping "hints" that he was the Zodiac, but not saying anything that actually incriminated him. He said that his dead neighbor was a witness to it, knowing that police could not back that up.
If a police officer stopped him near a murder scene where there was a stabbing and he saw a bloody knife, is there any way in hell that he would just let him go without further question and not remember it or not file it in a report? That just does not make any sense to me.
After LHR they brought in everyone in the area who had a gun, and even tested a bunch of people who were arrested around the time of the incident that had nothing to do with Zodiac, just because they had guns. And some of them weren’t even the same kind used at the crime scene.
And that actually makes no sense, because he was questioned in Vallejo, so there was no way that it had anything to do with him being near Lake Berryessa on that day.
My point was that IF all that stuff about the knife was true, then that would indeed be suspicious, but the problem is that we have no way of knowing what is true or what isn’t. It seems to me that it is very possible that ALA made the whole thing up, because the whole interview was him dropping "hints" that he was the Zodiac, but not saying anything that actually incriminated him. He said that his dead neighbor was a witness to it, knowing that police could not back that up.
If a police officer stopped him near a murder scene where there was a stabbing and he saw a bloody knife, is there any way in hell that he would just let him go without further question and not remember it or not file it in a report? That just does not make any sense to me.
After LHR they brought in everyone in the area who had a gun, and even tested a bunch of people who were arrested around the time of the incident that had nothing to do with Zodiac, just because they had guns. And some of them weren’t even the same kind used at the crime scene.
And that actually makes no sense, because he was questioned in Vallejo, so there was no way that it had anything to do with him being near Lake Berryessa on that day.
But didn’t one of the Vallejo cops confirm this? I.e. that he had indeed been questioned about the knife? I forget the name of the particular guy who did say on the docu that this did happen. ALA volunteered that he was going up to Lake Berryessa and then changed his mind, so it isn’t a question of jurisdiction. He never said he was stopped at Lake Berryessa. In which case that would have been Napa so yeah, it wouldn’t apply, but it makes sense that it was his neighbor.
And yes, I don’t think that is good police work but I have read of similar things happening all the time. I mean, remember when Dahmer claimed the naked Laotian boy was his lover after he ran screaming naked out into the street, and the cops just let it go?
Also, if Dwight Schrute says its so, then I gotta concur. 
Maybe bears were involved.
He evidently of the opinion we had some information regarding a knife that we did not possess. Writer researched VPD files and unable to locate any report where Allen had previosuly been questioned regarding being Zodiac suspect. Also contacted Sgt. Lynch and he does not recall having questioned Allen.
