Compelling forensic evidence suggesting Zodiac was responsible for the murder of Nancy Bennallack, in Sacramento, bolsters the case he was responsible for Bates.
Both murders were extremely similar – the victims stabbed gratuitously after being stalked. viewtopic.php?f=37&t=4478&start=30

I agree, however, that the writer’s voice in the Bates letters drastically contrasts with that of the Zodiac letters. This would suggest an exaggerated illiteracy in the Zodiac letters, as a means of deceiving law enforcement, or Zodiac having worsening mental illness in the years following the Bates murder – were he responsible for both the killing and the Riverside letters.

I think the confession letter is a plausible match for the confirmed Zodiac communications taken as a body of work. Couple that with circumstantial evidence, his claiming responsibility and the examples of word matches outlined in other threads and I think there is a strong case to be made that it’s the same person. It’s inductive though, we can only say it’s "very likely", or "highly probable". And if something is highly likely then that makes it a very worthwhile lead.

Just because he lied about shooting a cop doesn’t mean his claims are unlikely. In fact when he lied about shooting the cop the claim was still followed up and was indeed a good lead, it just didn’t pan out. I mean if he claims a kill, would it be more, or less likely to be true, above the baseline?

Are claimed kills somehow not good leads? As if to say, "He said he did it, but I don’t think he did, so lets put it right at the bottom of the list of things look into".

I think people want certainty, they want to rule the letter in, or out. The confession sits somewhere between confirmed Zodiac communications and unconfirmed communications. It is either the most probable unconfirmed communication, or the least probable confirmed communication. It’s a very strong lead. Is it on par with a piece of Paul Stines shirt? Of course not, but that doesn’t relegate it to the scrap heap of wild conjecture and unsubstantiated rumor, as if it’s no better a lead then Ted Cruz.

I would suggest that any murder that occurred in roughly the same time period in and in roughly the same geographic region, that involved sending letters, any hypothesis that the crime is linked to Zodiac would begin life as "likely". I mean it would be impossible to quantify exactly how likely, but any reasonable person would investigate such a lead, with enthusiasm. There were other murders that involved letters being left that turned into dead ends, but that doesn’t mean that a connection is no more likely than any other murder. As you go along pursuing such a lead if you were to find other tid bits of circumstantial evidence the probability of a connection would increase. If then the killer sent another letter claiming the kill surely the likelihood of a connection would become highly probable. Is it a certainty? No. But it’s a damn good lead. What level of certainty do we need before we agree that it’s a strong lead?

Well, taken as a lead – in isolation, as it were – it’s certainly a lot more compelling than your run-of-the-mill “possible” (in reality highly unlikely) Zodiac letter.

I tend to look at it this way, though:

The Riverside connection was made under certain circumstances: firstly, and specifically, at a time when LE needed a break in the Zodiac case. They were looking for – precisely – a lead, something new that could serve to crack the case. Secondly, and more generally, this took place in an era when handwriting analysis was considered an important investigatory tool – no, more than that, it was considered (as per available reports) the MOST important means to rule suspects in and out of the case. That’s a striking fact from a contemporary perspective.

The origin of the Riverside connection is a poem scratched on a desktop – which was authenticated as a Zodiac communication by a handwriting expert. It wasn’t even an uncontested conclusion (that has been discussed pretty much to death elsewhere) – but the point is that handwriting analysis played an absolutely crucial part in establishing the connection.

If the premise is false, what follows is, if not necessarily devoid of meaning or relevance, then certainly much less compelling. I don’t think Zodiac wrote that poem. I have never come across an even remotely convincing explanation for why the hell he would write that thing – and leave it where he did. I think it’s a red herring, in short – it has nothing to do with…anything, and could have been written years before Bates was killed. Could it be that Zodiac, nevertheless, killed Bates – and wrote the Confession, and the notes? Sure, anything’s possible. But if it weren’t for that poem, we wouldn’t be in here debating whether he did. The superficial similarities between Riverside and the canonical Zodiac series wouldn’t have been enough to make anyone connect any dots – certainly not to the point where many who theorize about this case actually presuppose that Bates was a de facto Zodiac victim.

"If the premise is false, what follows is, if not necessarily devoid of meaning or relevance, then certainly much less compelling." – normally i’d agree with this, but in this case i think we have the "luck" variable. i don’t think the desktop poem was written by zodiac and frankly there isn’t really any reason to think it was – nothing in the poem compels us to believe it’s specifically about bates and there’s no way to even determine when it was written. it was found two months after her murder, but could have been written months or years earlier.

however if that was the clue that brought the zodiac spotlight to her death and subsequent mailings about her murder then i think we lucked into something that might be related to zodiac. zodiac’s whole murder methodology is uninspired – he either shoots or stabs his victims. in 1970, 84% of homicides were either by shooting or cutting/stabbing ( https://www.infoplease.com/us/crime/mur … apons-used). his victim total is small, so trying to gather data from his victim profiles is one of those "sure, if it fits a theory". he killed couples except when he didn’t. he claimed his kills except maybe sometimes he didn’t and maybe other times he claimed murders he didn’t commit. hard to make any conclusions from his murders when compared to bates.

the one thing he did that’s odd, for murder, is he wanted people to know about him. most murderers don’t do that. it makes sense. you want to get away with it. calling attention to yourself increases the likelihood of getting caught. writing letters, mailing them, repeating the process, that’s really risky stuff. it’s why we don’t see that a lot.

the compelling part of comparing the bates case to zodiac is you have two cases of people writing about murders that maybe they did/didn’t commit, and mailing those letters to newspapers. the tone of bates/zodiac letters are really similar too – part fantasy, written to be cruel, threatening, requesting the letters be published for all to see. they also have that thread of meandering – like the authors want to write something but don’t really know what to say. the bates letter is typed, but that’s nov 1966. in 1967 he sends letters again, this time including bates’ father and they’re handwritten. it does look like a progression towards what we know as zodiac.

anyway, i don’t see a connection with zodiac and the poem, i’m unable to draw any conclusions about the murder itself, but if the poem was the catalyst for comparing the letter writer(s) then i’m glad someone lucked into it.

It seems Zodiac cared–albeit negatively–about CJB, whereas subsequent victims were more or less statistics secondary to the method/s used to kill them.

We can’t take that as a given. There is very little I am certain of regarding the Zodiac. It’s quite possible he knew all of his victims in one way or another.

There’s some evidence he rode in the front seat with Stine and Stine would supposedly only let friends ride up front. TV is working on evidence of a connection between CJB and Cecelia Shepard, he also now considers CJB a definite Zodiac victim. So we don’t know all the angles here, it also just as possible they were all rank strangers to him.

what is the evidence that zodiac sat next to stine?

"If the premise is false, what follows is, if not necessarily devoid of meaning or relevance, then certainly much less compelling."

Yes, but also the two major premises are, he claimed the murder and letters were written. Those are factual premises. From those we draw the inductive inference that he was "likely", or "very likely" responsible. Further reasoning based on that inference would be just that, based on inference, not fact, which is I think what your getting at. Well anyway, I’m sure you understand that, I’m just not sure that everyone gets it. We can only talk about likelihood, but I really want to emphasize that the likelihood is indeed very high.

what is the evidence that zodiac sat next to stine?

Everytime this comes up someone repeats the evidence, apparently the gloves were in the front, the gun shot wound is angled differently to how most people imagine and the eyewitness reports indicated he was in the front at least from the time they saw him.

But I have no idea how true any of that is…

what is the evidence that zodiac sat next to stine?

Everytime this comes up someone repeats the evidence, apparently the gloves were in the front, the gun shot wound is angled differently to how most people imagine and the eyewitness reports indicated he was in the front at least from the time they saw him.

But I have no idea how true any of that is…

Paul’s sister, Carol, publicly stated that Paul only allowed individuals he knew to ride in front. And according to Carol, Inspector Armstrong told her that Zodiac rode in front.

what is the evidence that zodiac sat next to stine?

Everytime this comes up someone repeats the evidence, apparently the gloves were in the front, the gun shot wound is angled differently to how most people imagine and the eyewitness reports indicated he was in the front at least from the time they saw him.

But I have no idea how true any of that is…

Paul’s sister, Carol, publicly stated that Paul only allowed individuals he knew to ride in front. And according to Carol, Inspector Armstrong told her that Zodiac rode in front.

Is Carol the only source Tom? I thought I read the gloves were in the front?

Writer of the confession letter states that with his next victim he would cut off her female parts and “deposit” them for the whole city to see. What did he mean deposit a body part? How’s everyone to see it if it’s deposited? You would “display” it, one would think. It’s a bank term obviously and was this a clue? Also, he states “keep your sisters, daughters, and wive off the streets and alleys”. Sisters being the first on his mind while he’s writing, sisters being most important to him in order to get his message heard loud & clear. Was it a message meant for Cheri’s brother? The referral to Cheri as “Bates” puts me in mind of authority talk like military or LE by calling her by her last name.

Theforeigner: I’d bet that Cheri’s murder was personal. "THE CONFESSION"; "Bates Had to Die" notes; The library poem, evidently written before her murder. Cheri was the first of Z’s murders, and psychologically probably not intended, d/t the small knife used, and which was probably regularly carried by Z. I think Z knew Cheri, probably from HS, and might have had a negative relationship with her which he wanted to improve. Obviously, he failed.