Yes. Lots of talk on these pages and elsewhere. No proof of any links other than locale.

For those who want to chime in, who have had ideas, please provide links to your threads.

In ’91 Bryan Hartnell was an attorney in Loma Linda, CA. He’s probably retired by now (if still alive). Maybe try contacting him?

He’s only 69 and still alive.

…and doesn’t like to be contacted that much. There should be something solid, not just e.g. Ross-Sullivan-was-it-hypothesises. BUT it is indeed interesting that he is now in Loma Linda, where Cecilia had come from. Might have had private reasons ((Cecilia?) for that, I guess.

There is a vage connection between Cecilia and CJB besides Loma Linda / Riverside area (as if that wasn’t enought…thousands of countys but CS and CJB 500 yards away from each other. The connection is called ‘music’. Cecilia, as I read somewhere, had attended music courses at Riverside University. CJB had composition books in her VW when she was murdered.

Another connection might be that it was said that Dee had witnessed a murder. She also was known to fly to LA area (details?). Her sister Pam’s opinion, although not 100% credible, was that she had witnessed the murder of CJB, for what its worth.

QT

He’s only 69 and still alive.

It really goes to show how young the victims were. Most would only be in their sixties now.

Stine was the oldest "official" Zodiac victim, just 9 weeks short of turning 30.

I threw an eye at pictures of him when he was even younger, and I was surprised at how he actually looked just like a dark-haired version of the composite of Zodiac that was made by the Presidio Heights eyewitnesses:

This tends to show Zodiac had a very common look as far as his haircut and the shape of his glasses (absence of facial hair as well, I would say from obersvation).

There is a vage connection between Cecilia and CJB besides Loma Linda / Riverside area (as if that wasn’t enought…thousands of countys but CS and CJB 500 yards away…

What is this 500 yard thing you speak of?

Claypooles: Stine’s photo is just one of the who knows how many photos, sketches, etc. that have been "identified" as Zodiac.

There is a vage connection between Cecilia and CJB besides Loma Linda / Riverside area (as if that wasn’t enought…thousands of countys but CS and CJB 500 yards away…

What is this 500 yard thing you speak of?

There was a thread somewhere that La Sierra music students had frequented Riverside University for music courses. As far as I know, CS was a student of La Sierra in 1967. La Sierra University is located next to Riverside University.

In advance: I do not know any schedules nor can I (yet) verify that CS has actually been there. La Sierra is approximately 1.1 miles from Magnolia Avenue, Riverside. From University of Riverside, the distance to Magnolia Avenue is about 0.3 miles only; which equals approximately 528 yards.

It is true, the distance from La Sierra University to Riverside City College is almost 9 miles but in fact the same STREET, Magnolia Avenue, is very close to where CS had actually studied. Depending on how strict someone looks at it, the distance from CS’s La Sierra/Riverside University and CJB’s college/murdersite is somewhere between 528 yards (‘same street’) and 9 miles (‘actual distance’).

California has a total area of approximately 163,696 square miles. CS studying in a distance of 528 yards, or even 9 miles, away from the street where CJB had actually been going to college, is more than ‘accidential’ in my opinion (9 divided by 163,696 = 0.000055% thus the odds are 1:18,188 that this had happened accidentially…with 528 yards it’s almost 1:500,000). It is possible, however, that the only connection between CS and CJB was Z. Both were interested in studying music, too (CJB composition books on passenger seat, CS music student).

In 2009, a ‘roommate’ of CS had written:

I was Cecelia Shepard’s roommate at La Sierra College during the academic year of 1966-67, our sophomore year. Even though her family lived in nearby Loma Linda, Cecelia lived the Angwin dorm. I do not think that Cecelia knew Cheri Jo Bates but I am not positive. The reasons are as follows: (1) Cecelia was a 7th Day Adventist and they are warned against mingling with non-believers, (2) her father was an elder in the SDA church and would certainly agree with not having SDA friends, (3) Cecelia lived on the La Sierra Campus and at that time was somewhat isolated if you didn’t have a car (4) Cecelia worked 1/2 time to pay her expenses at La Sierra. She also had to study hard for good grades. She didn’t have a lot of free time. All friends of Cecelia that I met were known to her from SDA church or SDA church school. She wasn’t the rebel type when I knew her; in fact, she was somewhat in awe at my casual attitude towards SDA strictures and the fact that my fiancee was not an SDA.

The ‘Anwin dorm’ appears to be the ‘Angwin hall’ in Riverside. It still seems to be a dorming facility for students of La Sierra University. CS had walked up these stairs in 1967:

The 1967 La Sierra yearbook is not available on classmates.

Cecelia Ann Shepard is listed as ‘Notable alumni’ of La Sierra:

La Sierra University Notable alumni: The term ‘Notable alumni’ refers to distinguished graduates of the La Sierra University who have excelled in a particular field of expertise. The names of highly successful, previous students of the La Sierra University are Fritz Guy, Katherine Siva Saubel, David Pendleton, Steve Wohlberg, Darwood Kaye, Bill Emmerson, Rene Noorbergen, Chauncey Hare, Cecelia Ann Shepard.
https://www.colleges-and-universities.e … ersity.htm

Roommate:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/zodiack … t3055.html

CS La Sierra in 1967:
https://www.myheritage.hu/research/coll … showRecord

Claypooles: Stine’s photo is just one of the who knows how many photos, sketches, etc. that have been "identified" as Zodiac.

Tell me more, please. Not quite sure I understand.

Clay: I don’t have a list of individuals identified as possible Zodiacs. It’s just that there are so many people "who look just like Zodiac" that the "identifications" become virtually worthless. Further, how many people whose lives are threatened are going to accurately remember what their potential murderers look like? Personally, I wouldn’t be looking at the guy; I’d be looking for an escape route.

CS La Sierra in 1967:
https://www.myheritage.hu/research/coll … showRecord

There is also an English version of this webpage, here, azok számára, akik nem beszélnek magyarul.

California has a total area of approximately 163,696 square miles. CS studying in a distance of 528 yards, or even 9 miles, away from the street where CJB had actually been going to college, is more than ‘accidential’ in my opinion (9 divided by 163,696 = 0.000055% thus the odds are 1:18,188 that this had happened accidentially…with 528 yards it’s almost 1:500,000). It is possible, however, that the only connection between CS and CJB was Z. Both were interested in studying music, too (CJB composition books on passenger seat, CS music student).

I seem to be replying to a lot of messages from you today, QT. Not picking on you, honest. Just how it’s rolling.

I’m trying to understand your probability reasoning here, and trying to figure how dividing a distance (in miles) by an area (in square miles) gives you anything meaningful at all? A ‘probability’ is a dimensionless quantity. Your result comes out at a ‘per mile’.

Wouldn’t it be more appropriate, in estimating probability, to look as something like: estimate the number of people in California at the time, of the general age of Cecilia and Cheri Jo and with college eligibility; estimate the number of college places across the state where they could have attended and then work out the probability that they could both get any college place in CA at the same time; then, do a weighting based on how many places were available at the college(s) in question to get the probability that two young women were thereabouts in the same area at the same time.

I don’t know what that approach would get you, but if I was to be told that two people of a near age in the UK happened to attend at the same, or nearby, college/university, I don’t think I’d be particularly excited?

Then, if you factor in things like what they were majoring in, and are there key colleges in the state where you would go to find that, the probability might even start to come down to something like "what’s the probability that they both wanted to study music?" (Hypothetical: both wanted to major in music – college X is the only (or best) college in CA offering music majors – they are of a similar age – chances of being in close proximity during their studying = 1, for all intents and purposes.)

I guess part of my point is, colleges (campuses) are, by their nature centralising places. They bring people together, people like Cecilia and Cheri Jo.

California has a total area of approximately 163,696 square miles. CS studying in a distance of 528 yards, or even 9 miles, away from the street where CJB had actually been going to college, is more than ‘accidential’ in my opinion (9 divided by 163,696 = 0.000055% thus the odds are 1:18,188 that this had happened accidentially…with 528 yards it’s almost 1:500,000). It is possible, however, that the only connection between CS and CJB was Z. Both were interested in studying music, too (CJB composition books on passenger seat, CS music student).

I seem to be replying to a lot of messages from you today, QT. Not picking on you, honest. Just how it’s rolling.

I’m trying to understand your probability reasoning here, and trying to figure how dividing a distance (in miles) by an area (in square miles) gives you anything meaningful at all? A ‘probability’ is a dimensionless quantity. Your result comes out at a ‘per mile’.

Wouldn’t it be more appropriate, in estimating probability, to look as something like: estimate the number of people in California at the time, of the general age of Cecilia and Cheri Jo and with college eligibility; estimate the number of college places across the state where they could have attended and then work out the probability that they could both get any college place in CA at the same time; then, do a weighting based on how many places were available at the college(s) in question to get the probability that two young women were thereabouts in the same area at the same time.

I don’t know what that approach would get you, but if I was to be told that two people of a near age in the UK happened to attend at the same, or nearby, college/university, I don’t think I’d be particularly excited?

Then, if you factor in things like what they were majoring in, and are there key colleges in the state where you would go to find that, the probability might even start to come down to something like "what’s the probability that they both wanted to study music?" (Hypothetical: both wanted to major in music – college X is the only (or best) college in CA offering music majors – they are of a similar age – chances of being in close proximity during their studying = 1, for all intents and purposes.)

I guess part of my point is, colleges (campuses) are, by their nature centralising places. They bring people together, people like Cecilia and Cheri Jo.

Shaqmeister, I agree the statistical claim above is flawed for many reasons. You identified several, here are more:

1. Why consider the total area of just California? Why not the total area of the USA, or even the world? The total area of California is meaningless in any type of calculation.
2. Calling something a significant coincidence, because two people come in proximity to each other at one time, in one situation, does not take into consideration all the many times they do not. For example, the next time I go to a specific gas station to fill up, what are the odds a specific person will also be there? Well, slim, but if I do not cross paths with this person in any other way, it is meaningless. Think of all the opportunities a person has to encounter someone else: school, work, living in a neighborhood, going to a dentist, doctor, vet, being in a club, hiring a plumber, electrician, having a garbage man or mailman, UPS delivery driver, etc., and day to day routines like shopping, dining out, and so on. Add these all up and each of us has some similarity and contact access to thousands of other people, most of whom we never have much interaction with. So if we do have a random, distant connection to someone, from a statistical perspective, it should be discounted based on the thousands of such possible connections we do NOT have with that person.
3. If someone who could be considered a somewhat viable suspect (let’s use Ross as an example with CJB) is shown to know a victim personally, live and work in close proximity to the victim and the crime scene, was known to be attracted to girls who generally looked like her, then that might be relevant, because the implication is that, with the addition of some mental instability and violent tendencies, the suspect could perhaps have killed the victim.

But in great contrast, what is meaningful about some possible coincidence between CS and CJB? If they did briefly cross paths, so what?