Oh! And who could really "almost decapitate" someone with what was (essentially) little more than a pen knife? I find the phrase is a very annoying one, used to sell newspapers on that occasion ‘cos it’s lurid. Ridiculous.

Cheri’s throat was slashed very deep, though, Smithy. As per the autopsy report, her larynx, carotids and jugulars were sliced through almost to the underlying bone. The description may be lurid, but it’s not necessarily inaccurate.

Oh! And who could really "almost decapitate" someone with what was (essentially) little more than a pen knife? I find the phrase is a very annoying one, used to sell newspapers on that occasion ‘cos it’s lurid. Ridiculous.

Cheri’s throat was slashed very deep, though, Smithy. As per the autopsy report, her larynx, carotids and jugulars were sliced through almost to the underlying bone. The description may be lurid, but it’s not necessarily inaccurate.

It was obviously a more brutal and passionate murder than the confirmed Z cases, whether she was almost decapitated or not. Like most aspects of this case I’m on the fence about whether it was Z or not. So much about this murder is different than the rest, but she was a young student, which fits with the other victims. And that confession letter, which has so much in common with Z’s correspondence, yet slightly different in tone, with it’s dramatic flare. It is very similar to the solved cipher in tone though. But generally his letters were more matter of fact and less sensational and romanticized. Sending taunting letters is somewhat rare for a serial killer, and so to have two seperate cases of a writing campaign only a few years apart and in the same state (albiet a high murdering rate state) would be extremely rare. But than again, maybe Z was inspired by the confession letter, and is himself a copycat. It’s this uncertainty that draws and drives me to this case, but it also makes me a little crazy.

Cheri’s throat was slashed very deep, though, Smithy. As per the autopsy report, her larynx, carotids and jugulars were sliced through almost to the underlying bone. The description may be lurid, but it’s not necessarily inaccurate.

"Almost" to the underlying bone. Uh, not decapitated then. Not "almost" decapitated.
Like "nearly unique" and "close to pregnant"? I think absolutes should be reserved to express absolutes. But then opinion’s opinion. *shrug* Not much point in you and I arguing semantics though I guess, since they printed it.

"she was a young student, which fits with the other victims……"

Well, yes, sort of.
Though one of them was a Taxi driver, one of them a waitress and one of them was a burglarising pot-head (smack-head?) sneak thief. (Probably). I’m not sure that’s a "young student" fit. BWDIK.
Double points for anyone who retorts "Paul Stine WAS a student though Smithy! Ha!"

Looking at how many serial killers start out, it’s not unusual for the first murder to vary from subsequent acts in some ways – especially in that a first murder may often be more personal and therefore create a more ’emotional’ reaction by the killer – also, killers are known to try things and decide they don’t want to do a particular act again, in which case it’s no reason to discount Zodiac from this crime on this basis.
However…… things get a lot more complicated if we look at this crime from the perspective of Domingos/Edwards. If Zodiac started with those two victims then Cheri is not the first and the above comparison holds a lot less water. In fact, it seems that accepting one of these crimes as the work of Z renders the other more confusing as motives become a lot less clear, some examples being:
– a classmate of Cheri would be very unlikely a classmate/schoolmate of Domingos/Edwards
– Both are considered to be a first-time crime (the ‘confession letter’ even states CJB is his first < EDIT : I’ve since been corrected on this
– you would expect a perp to graduate from a single target to a couple, not the other way round (although Domingos may have scared him from this MO)

So I think the question of rage is a very good one but may tell us more about the meta-timeline than this particular crime.

Just to be clear, the confession letter says "She is not the first and she will not be the last". Which may or may not be true, of course….

Just to be clear, the confession letter says "She is not the first and she will not be the last". Which may or may not be true, of course….

Thanks for the correction Smithy – that’ll teach me to count on my memory . I had remembered it as "she was the first and will not be the last".