If this is true, then why did he lie about his actual identity? (escaped prisoner from Montana needing a car)

I have no good answer for that, except that this offender has not behaved in a rational, predictable manner ever. Perhaps he was "toying" with his intended victims?

If this is true, then why did he lie about his actual identity? (escaped prisoner from Montana needing a car)

I have no good answer for that, except that this offender has not behaved in a rational, predictable manner ever. Perhaps he was "toying" with his intended victims?

But if his intent was to terrify his victims by wearing his symbol, then “toying” with them about being an escaped convict would be counterintuitive. It doesn’t make sense.

If this is true, then why did he lie about his actual identity? (escaped prisoner from Montana needing a car)

I have no good answer for that, except that this offender has not behaved in a rational, predictable manner ever. Perhaps he was "toying" with his intended victims?

But if his intent was to terrify his victims by wearing his symbol, then “toying” with them about being an escaped convict would be counterintuitive. It doesn’t make sense.

Maybe as the costume didn’t have the initial desired effect possibly he thought that insinuating that he was an escapee murder would.

Just playing devil’s advocate

When Betty and David died they had been ushered out of the car then shot. No way of knowing whether the Zodiac had some sort of hood or anything then, although, I doubt he did. The Zodiac sends a letter a few months later boasting of his crimes.

He does fairly well the same thing with Darlene and Mike. The only exception is that he shot them while they were in the car. The reason for this, I feel, is because in the first crime Betty ran. He didn’t give Darlene or Mike that chance. The Zodiac is compensating here. He is trying to make sure that the events from before (someone potentially getting away) doesn’t happen again. The Zodiac fails though. Mike lived and was able to give some sort of description of Zodiac, his car and some details of what happened. The Zodiac writes another letter. This letter is pretty much the same as the previous letter but with some corrections to reports.

At this point the Zodiac knows if he ushers them out of the car he may have to gun them down as they ran. So he compensates with the next crime by shooting them in a car. He knows from the Ferrin/Mageau crime that, even though he has trapped them in a car so to speak, one may live and give some detail of his appearance. So, at the time of Cecilia and Bryan, the Zodiac is full aware that one of his victims might live and give details. So he compensates again and creates the hood, first and more importantly, to hide his identity in case a victim lives. Bryan Hartnell does live and very little to no detail was given about Zodiac’s description. The hood, I also believe, served a second purpose; to scare. He had this big ego about him. He was all over the news. Why wouldn’t, in his mindset I assume, would anyone not know this symbol?

The zodiac, however, didn’t just compensate with the hood though. When Mageau lived he gave details. Betty and David couldn’t give details because they died. A living victim was now new for the Zodiac. He had someone, other than himself, giving details. So when he attacks Cecilia and Bryan he already had a story to give them because he already accepted the possibility that one of them may live and live to give details. The Zodiac is all about himself, his agenda and his details. Bryan Hartnell lives and does indeed give details. The interesting thing here is that he gave details that the Zodiac gave to him. The Zodiac compensated again. He told his story vicariously through a living victim. If Bryan had not lived the Zodiac would have mailed a letter and would have probably contained some or all of the same info he told Cecilia and Bryan. The reason: the story he gave is his letter.

Great thoughts, Soze. I agree.

This also strikes me as a killer who is still learning to kill, not an experienced killer who has been doing this for years.

When Betty and David died they had been ushered out of the car then shot. No way of knowing whether the Zodiac had some sort of hood or anything then, although, I doubt he did. The Zodiac sends a letter a few months later boasting of his crimes.

He does fairly well the same thing with Darlene and Mike. The only exception is that he shot them while they were in the car. The reason for this, I feel, is because in the first crime Betty ran. He didn’t give Darlene or Mike that chance. The Zodiac is compensating here. He is trying to make sure that the events from before (someone potentially getting away) doesn’t happen again. The Zodiac fails though. Mike lived and was able to give some sort of description of Zodiac, his car and some details of what happened. The Zodiac writes another letter. This letter is pretty much the same as the previous letter but with some corrections to reports.

At this point the Zodiac knows if he ushers them out of the car he may have to gun them down as they ran. So he compensates with the next crime by shooting them in a car. He knows from the Ferrin/Mageau crime that, even though he has trapped them in a car so to speak, one may live and give some detail of his appearance. So, at the time of Cecilia and Bryan, the Zodiac is full aware that one of his victims might live and give details. So he compensates again and creates the hood, first and more importantly, to hide his identity in case a victim lives. Bryan Hartnell does live and very little to no detail was given about Zodiac’s description. The hood, I also believe, served a second purpose; to scare. He had this big ego about him. He was all over the news. Why wouldn’t, in his mindset I assume, would anyone not know this symbol?

The zodiac, however, didn’t just compensate with the hood though. When Mageau lived he gave details. Betty and David couldn’t give details because they died. A living victim was now new for the Zodiac. He had someone, other than himself, giving details. So when he attacks Cecilia and Bryan he already had a story to give them because he already accepted the possibility that one of them may live and live to give details. The Zodiac is all about himself, his agenda and his details. Bryan Hartnell lives and does indeed give details. The interesting thing here is that he gave details that the Zodiac gave to him. The Zodiac compensated again. He told his story vicariously through a living victim. If Bryan had not lived the Zodiac would have mailed a letter and would have probably contained some or all of the same info he told Cecilia and Bryan. The reason: the story he gave is his letter.

VERY nice reasoning!

Zodiac could have used his foot-long knife to simply cut their throats, and Bryan and Cecelia would have been guaranteed dead within 30 seconds; both victims were bound and helpless. So I don’t think being previously seen was the motivation for his Berryessa costume. Not to mention one wouldn’t have needed to create something so elaborate to simply conceal his face.

Also, if a surviving victim was the reason for no Berryessa letter, why was there a letter following Blue Rock Springs?

Chaucer and Margie:

Thank you.

Tom:

My post wasn’t about could/would/wouldn’t have’s. Certainly he "could have" used his knife to slit their throat but, the fact is, he didn’t. They surely "would have" been dead within 30 seconds but, the fact is, they weren’t. My opinion on this and, up to this point, is that the Zodiac was not an experienced killer. I don’t mean that to sound as though Lake Herman was his first kill. I think he had been killing and has killed for a lot longer than some give him credit. I am talking about, and I am not sure I will say it the way that it should be said, his mindset. He does not seem like a crazy person with the stomach to kill over and over again as we see with, Jack the Ripper for example, who had no problem in dissecting a human being. That’s not the Zodiac. The Zodiac is quite lucid. Other motivating factors put him on a mission to kill. Through his attempts to complete this mission he’s learning and he is compensating and changing things as he learns. And of course, yes, he "wouldn’t" have needed to create an elaborate hood to simply conceal his identity but this would be only IF he had gotten what he wanted to begin with; Darleen and Mike BOTH DEAD. Additionally, if you had read my post without the desire to (as you typically do), go for the throat as you claim the Zodiac "could have" done, you would have seen that I referenced a dual M.O. in regards to the hood. A dual M.O. can happen and has happened in other cases. I think before you start attacking my last statement or, ask for examples which you will surely not get from me, you should take some time out and read up on M.O., Signature Aspect and Signature Behavior. And just in case you desire to make some statement along the lines of "I know all about it", yadah, yadah, yadah – It’s clear, from someone who has read the materials, you don’t.

In regards to your last statement concerning Blue Rock Springs:

That first letter was not about Mageau and what little detail he gave of the events. It was about the Zodiac and about him bragging of the events. And I don’t think he much cared about what little details Mageau may have gave when he wrote the second letter dated August of 1969. That letter was more to do with bragging once again about what HE has done and correcting statements that he obviously read, saw or heard about in regards to the events that night. But still, he knows at this point that people, whether it be Mageau, the press or even law enforcement, will tell of events that will contradict HIS version, HIS details or HIS truth that he feels needs to be heard. So when he gets to Cecilia & Bryan, he is conscious of a victim potentially living, potentially telling their version of events and potentially robbing him of the opportunity to tell HIS story the way HE wants to tell it. Everything, from beginning to end, has always been the Zodiac – for the Zodiac.

When Betty and David died they had been ushered out of the car then shot. No way of knowing whether the Zodiac had some sort of hood or anything then, although, I doubt he did. The Zodiac sends a letter a few months later boasting of his crimes.

He does fairly well the same thing with Darlene and Mike. The only exception is that he shot them while they were in the car. The reason for this, I feel, is because in the first crime Betty ran. He didn’t give Darlene or Mike that chance. The Zodiac is compensating here. He is trying to make sure that the events from before (someone potentially getting away) doesn’t happen again. The Zodiac fails though. Mike lived and was able to give some sort of description of Zodiac, his car and some details of what happened. The Zodiac writes another letter. This letter is pretty much the same as the previous letter but with some corrections to reports.

At this point the Zodiac knows if he ushers them out of the car he may have to gun them down as they ran. So he compensates with the next crime by shooting them in a car. He knows from the Ferrin/Mageau crime that, even though he has trapped them in a car so to speak, one may live and give some detail of his appearance. So, at the time of Cecilia and Bryan, the Zodiac is full aware that one of his victims might live and give details. So he compensates again and creates the hood, first and more importantly, to hide his identity in case a victim lives. Bryan Hartnell does live and very little to no detail was given about Zodiac’s description. The hood, I also believe, served a second purpose; to scare. He had this big ego about him. He was all over the news. Why wouldn’t, in his mindset I assume, would anyone not know this symbol?

The zodiac, however, didn’t just compensate with the hood though. When Mageau lived he gave details. Betty and David couldn’t give details because they died. A living victim was now new for the Zodiac. He had someone, other than himself, giving details. So when he attacks Cecilia and Bryan he already had a story to give them because he already accepted the possibility that one of them may live and live to give details. The Zodiac is all about himself, his agenda and his details. Bryan Hartnell lives and does indeed give details. The interesting thing here is that he gave details that the Zodiac gave to him. The Zodiac compensated again. He told his story vicariously through a living victim. If Bryan had not lived the Zodiac would have mailed a letter and would have probably contained some or all of the same info he told Cecilia and Bryan. The reason: the story he gave is his letter.

I think also Soze that this was the reason for the way the Presidio Heights attack was planned. His only completely successful attack previously had been the unfortunate David Farraday. In the other two consequent attacks he lost control of events, Paul Stine was shot in an very similar place to David and by using a Cab driver it meant that he could control the situation before the attack. Basically he went back to his tried and tested method which had previously given him the best results (apologies for sounding clinical), I.e. shooting the victim in the head from close range.

When Betty and David died they had been ushered out of the car then shot. No way of knowing whether the Zodiac had some sort of hood or anything then, although, I doubt he did. The Zodiac sends a letter a few months later boasting of his crimes.

He does fairly well the same thing with Darlene and Mike. The only exception is that he shot them while they were in the car. The reason for this, I feel, is because in the first crime Betty ran. He didn’t give Darlene or Mike that chance. The Zodiac is compensating here. He is trying to make sure that the events from before (someone potentially getting away) doesn’t happen again. The Zodiac fails though. Mike lived and was able to give some sort of description of Zodiac, his car and some details of what happened. The Zodiac writes another letter. This letter is pretty much the same as the previous letter but with some corrections to reports.

At this point the Zodiac knows if he ushers them out of the car he may have to gun them down as they ran. So he compensates with the next crime by shooting them in a car. He knows from the Ferrin/Mageau crime that, even though he has trapped them in a car so to speak, one may live and give some detail of his appearance. So, at the time of Cecilia and Bryan, the Zodiac is full aware that one of his victims might live and give details. So he compensates again and creates the hood, first and more importantly, to hide his identity in case a victim lives. Bryan Hartnell does live and very little to no detail was given about Zodiac’s description. The hood, I also believe, served a second purpose; to scare. He had this big ego about him. He was all over the news. Why wouldn’t, in his mindset I assume, would anyone not know this symbol?

The zodiac, however, didn’t just compensate with the hood though. When Mageau lived he gave details. Betty and David couldn’t give details because they died. A living victim was now new for the Zodiac. He had someone, other than himself, giving details. So when he attacks Cecilia and Bryan he already had a story to give them because he already accepted the possibility that one of them may live and live to give details. The Zodiac is all about himself, his agenda and his details. Bryan Hartnell lives and does indeed give details. The interesting thing here is that he gave details that the Zodiac gave to him. The Zodiac compensated again. He told his story vicariously through a living victim. If Bryan had not lived the Zodiac would have mailed a letter and would have probably contained some or all of the same info he told Cecilia and Bryan. The reason: the story he gave is his letter.

I think also Soze that this was the reason for the way the Presidio Heights attack was planned. His only completely successful attack previously had been the unfortunate David Farraday. In the other two consequent attacks he lost control of events, Paul Stine was shot in an very similar place to David and by using a Cab driver it meant that he could control the situation before the attack. Basically he went back to his tried and tested method which had previously given him the best results (apologies for sounding clinical), I.e. shooting the victim in the head from close range.

Exactly!

Zodiac didn’t do things the way we think he should have. The idea that a guy who was motivated to dress in a costume to kill in broad daylight, was worried about his face being seen doesn’t make sense to me. Especially since he followed it up with a murder in front of several people, when he could have directed Stine to a much more isolated spot with no witnesses.

Zodiac didn’t do things the way we think he should have. The idea that a guy who was motivated to dress in a costume to kill in broad daylight, was worried about his face being seen doesn’t make sense to me. Especially since he followed it up with a murder in front of several people, when he could have directed Stine to a much more isolated spot with no witnesses.

“ Zodiac didn’t do things the way we think he should have “ can you elaborate on this Tom ?

“ Especially since he followed it up with a murder in front of several people, when he could have directed Stine to a much more isolated spot with no witnesses.” I agree the location was not perfect but we were postulating on the way he killed Paul Stine and its relation to earlier attacks not the location. The question this statement leads me to is (I Assume we are talking about the 3 children) did he KNOW their were witnesses (except for LE car which he quoted in letter), one would have to assume no as he does no mention it. Perhaps he did know and did not want to lend weight to the account, but I don’t see why this would be the case as it would have obviously been him, and he did take credit in a letter. I think it is fairly obvious that this was this was pre-planned. Maximum impact (I.e. one of the wealthiest parts of SF) with minimum risk (I.e. on the absolute outskirts of SF with the quickest escape route across the bay ??

Zodiac didn’t do things the way we think he should have. The idea that a guy who was motivated to dress in a costume to kill in broad daylight, was worried about his face being seen doesn’t make sense to me. Especially since he followed it up with a murder in front of several people, when he could have directed Stine to a much more isolated spot with no witnesses.

“ Zodiac didn’t do things the way we think he should have “ can you elaborate on this Tom ?

“ Especially since he followed it up with a murder in front of several people, when he could have directed Stine to a much more isolated spot with no witnesses.” I agree the location was not perfect but we were postulating on the way he killed Paul Stine and its relation to earlier attacks not the location. The question this statement leads me to is (I Assume we are talking about the 3 children) did he KNOW their were witnesses (except for LE car which he quoted in letter), one would have to assume no as he does no mention it. Perhaps he did know and did not want to lend weight to the account, but I don’t see why this would be the case as it would have obviously been him, and he did take credit in a letter. I think it is fairly obvious that this was this was pre-planned. Maximum impact (I.e. one of the wealthiest parts of SF) with minimum risk (I.e. on the absolute outskirts of SF with the quickest escape route across the bay ??

For me the question should be how did he know this location, he obviously wasn’t overly familiar with the streets themselves as he references Maple in his letter, but he goes to great lengths on the Julius Khan playground though.

Maximum impact (I.e. one of the wealthiest parts of SF) with minimum risk (I.e. on the absolute outskirts of SF with the quickest escape route across the bay ??

Yet he nearly gets caught.