Once it was in the press that the Riverside PD and the SFPD were considering a potential connection between the Zodiac killer murders and the CJB killing, Zodiac took the opportunity to vicariously increase his kill count by claiming the latter as one of his own. As he wrote in his letter to The Los Angeles Times of 13 March, 1971, clearly in response to the press reporting of the same:
I do have to give them credit for stumbling across my riverside activity, but they are only finding the easy ones, there are a hell of a lot more down there.
In wanting this to be a further taunt to the police, in the previous sentence he had sought to attribute a feeling of guilt through incompetence, stating:
Because the longer they fiddle & fool around, the more slaves I will collect for my after life.
But Zodiac here forgets that, in respect of the same purpose—his “collecting of slaves”—he had already ruled himself out of any homicides prior to the December 1968 double shooting of Faraday & Jenson through an unequivocal remark made in an earlier communication.
In wishing it to be clear to the police that he could offer information about this and the Blue Rock Springs shooting that only the killer would know, he probably didn’t think twice at this time about his disclosure when he wrote nearly a year later (in the ‘Death Machine’ letter of 09 November, 1969):
To prove that I am the Zodiac, Ask the Vallejo cop about my electric gun sight which I used to start my collecting of slaves.
Isn’t it time we just let go of what was always the slender, gossamer thread that only ever weakly tied the Bay Area killings to Riverside?
“This isn’t right! It’s not even wrong!”—Wolfgang Pauli (1900–1958)
Isn’t it time we just let go of what was always the slender, gossamer thread that only ever weakly tied the Bay Area killings to Riverside?
You do what ever you want bro.
Some of us will keep an open mind and consider the possibility that Zodiac killed CJB.
"To prove that I am the Zodiac, Ask the Vallejo cop about my electric gun sight which I used to start my collecting of slaves".
This statement in the Bus Bomb letter was made under the ‘umbrella of Zodiac’ about his declaration in the August 4th 1969 letter of "This is the Zodiac Speaking" while referring to his pencil flashlight. The inference made in the Los Angeles letter to Riverside, would have been outside the Zodiac umbrella. Had he already been Zodiac in Riverside, then he clearly didn’t announce this when he stated in the July 31st 1969 letters "I am the killer of the 2 teen-agers last Christmass at Lake Herman and the Girl last 4th of July", or "This is the murderer of the 2 teenagers last Christmass at Lake Herman + the girl on the 4th of July near the golf course in Vallejo". He most likely became Zodiac between July 31st and August 4th of 1969.
Hence, he wasn’t collecting slaves in Riverside because he wasn’t Zodiac at this juncture. If he was involved in Cheri Jo Bates’ murder at all.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/
“I simply cannot accept that there are, on every story, two equal and logical sides to an argument.” Edward R. Murrow.
Hence, he wasn’t collecting slaves in Riverside because he wasn’t Zodiac at this juncture. If he was involved in Cheri Jo Bates’ murder at all.
Certainly an interesting psychological idea, Richard. Against this, however, I would put the statement he made in Z408:
WHEN I DIE I WILL BE REBORN IN PARADICE AND ALL TH[E PEOPL]E I HAVE KILLED WILL BECOME MY SLAVES
Your idea would lead us to expect to see this as "all the people Zodiac has killed" (i.e., "all the people I have killed as Zodiac"), if we are to suspect some kind of compartmentalisation of personae.
‘Zodiac’ doesn’t make this distinction, however, so the point stands.
“This isn’t right! It’s not even wrong!”—Wolfgang Pauli (1900–1958)
Sorry, I’ll rephrase it. The only attacks committed under the Zodiac umbrella were Berryessa and Presidio Heights. Zodiac effectively didn’t commit the first two attacks, although they were the same person. But I certainly see what you’re saying. However, I have also considered that the pseudonym Zodiac may be present in the 18 unsolved characters, which could change the whole dynamic. So I do understand + buy into your argument.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/
“I simply cannot accept that there are, on every story, two equal and logical sides to an argument.” Edward R. Murrow.
He never actually claims to have killed CJB, he alluded to it but the comments could equally refer to the letters in Riverside ? Seems an odd tact to take considering how brazen he was about past attacks.
He never actually claims to have killed CJB, he alluded to it but the comments could equally refer to the letters in Riverside ? Seems an odd tact to take considering how brazen he was about past attacks.
Yes, he was always very vague, like the Radetich hint, Donna Lass cryptic card, the Snoozy/Furlong "Aug" reference, the "woman a ride", and Bilek Monticello card. He always had an escape clause. Riverside activity, as you say, exactly the same.
I’m not fully convinced the Los Angeles letter was Zodiac, possibly 80/20 for, but another mailing outside of San Francisco.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/
“I simply cannot accept that there are, on every story, two equal and logical sides to an argument.” Edward R. Murrow.
He never actually claims to have killed CJB, he alluded to it but the comments could equally refer to the letters in Riverside ? Seems an odd tact to take considering how brazen he was about past attacks.
Yes, he was always very vague, like the Radetich hint, Donna Lass cryptic card, the Snoozy/Furlong "Aug" reference, the "woman a ride", and Bilek Monticello card. He always had an escape clause. Riverside activity, as you say, exactly the same.
I’m not fully convinced the Los Angeles letter was Zodiac, possibly, but another mailing outside of San Francisco.
Possible, do you think wrote he the Bates letters/Poems though ?
No. I would never be bold enough to totally rule out Zodiac for the CJB murder or the desktop poem, Confession and Bates’ letters, but I don’t believe he was involved in any, despite conjecturing and making a case for the idea many times. I think he inferred a Riverside link after Avery’s article, just to send people on a wild goose chase.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/
“I simply cannot accept that there are, on every story, two equal and logical sides to an argument.” Edward R. Murrow.
Uh..not to forget a three year time gap between 1966 to 1969…..?
Most of the previous is pure speculation. Besides CJB’s body, both, the article as some result of police investigation as well as Z’s reaction got onto the table.
A written confession is good enough for me.
QT
*ZODIACHRONOLOGY*
I wouldn’t assume that any of the statements made in letters are factually accurate, and I certainly wouldn’t base a firm conclusion on them.
He might’ve meant that he didn’t know how to collect his slaves properly until LHR, despite having killed before.
I think your interpretation is a valid one, but it is one of many valid ones.
An impressive op. I tend to lean towards it as I would never underestimate Zodiacs desire for publicity and notoriety. He was invariably trying to increase his media profile & kill count. However, we don’t know if he actually was collecting the souls of his victims AND compartmentalizing his killing persona(s). The op’ s argument is more grounded in fact than those trying to shoot it down, I think.
Other than that I think we should remain fairly open minded about the CJB murder until otherwise proven it was NOT zodiac.
Uh..not to forget a three year time gap between 1966 to 1969…..?
1968 actually, but it was close enough to 1969 we’ll call it good.
Other than the letters there really isn’t much about the Bates murder that resemble Zodiac attacks. However there is the thought that CJB was different because it was personal. Who the hell knows?
