morf13
Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:25 pm

Good Article! Thanks for posting it. I wanna know who the VTH Reporter is with stars on his ceiling

_________________

smithy
Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:53 am

Thanks Tahoe – how fantastically revealing that article is. Mulanax gets his information from a novel, and is made to appear disappointed that Ken Narlow doesn’t call him regularly and often, and just like us, he and Lynch aren’t sure which crimes were committed by "The Zodiac". My my.
_________________

entropy
Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:23 am

smithy wrote:
Thanks Tahoe – how fantastically revealing that article is. Mulanax gets his information from a novel, and is made to appear disappointed that Ken Narlow doesn’t call him regularly and often, and just like us, he and Lynch aren’t sure which crimes were committed by "The Zodiac". My my.

Even more disturbing, IMO, is that Sgt. Mulanax doesn’t even seem to realize that "Starr" from Zodiac Unmasked is actually Arthur Leigh Allen, or at least he seems to have no idea what has come of this individual he believes is Zodiac.

"Starr, who Graysmith believes is Zodiac, is either dead or in some type of institution, or he’s left the country, Mulanax said."

I seriously hope I’m reading that wrong.

And Sgt. Lynch doesn’t believe "Zodiac" killed Faraday & Jensen because he failed to call himself Zodiac in the first letter???

Did Zodiac then just guess the typo of ammo used (Super X), number of shots fired (10) and detailed positioning of Jensen’s body ("girl was lyeing on right side feet to west)?

http://zodiackiller.com/VTHLetter1.html

Is there any possibility that this info. could have been gleaned from newspaper reports? If not, Z’s failure to sign his name on the letter despite taking credit seems to be kind of superfluous, no?

__________

smithy
Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:35 am

All true.
Disheartening, isn’t it.
Still, perhaps it’s another salutory lesson that "We must not believe everything that we read in the newspapers".
Rather than a revealing insight into the stupidity of both major investigators.
_________________

traveller1st
Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:53 am

Good read.

Thanks Tahoe & Tracers.

Yes, what to read into that? It certainly sounds like they knew less than we do lol, at that point. Although, the article is from 1986 and most likely written on the back of the publication of ‘Zodiac’ by GS so it is slanted towards that as you can read from the article and what we are probably reading are responses to what they thought about the book or parts thereof and not just questions about the case.

_________________

QueenOfClews
Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:55 pm

My favorite quote, " The crimes were so similar, they had to be done by the same person."

That statement is not only lame, literally weak and limping, but also lacking in truth. While there are similarities among the cases, there are striking differences as well.

Stine would have never been attributed to Z if he hadn’t mailed the letter with the souvenir he had collected.

I found the article to be interesting all the same. Thanks for sharing it!

__________

smithy
Sat Dec 15, 2012 12:40 am

-QueenOfClews wrote:

My favorite quote, " The crimes were so similar, they had to be done by the same person."
That statement is not only lame, literally weak and limping, but also lacking in truth. While there are similarities among the cases, there are striking differences as well.
Stine would have never been attributed to Z if he hadn’t mailed the letter with the souvenir he had collected.

QFT.

_________________

tahoe27
Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:37 am

smithy wrote:
QueenOfClews wrote:

My favorite quote, " The crimes were so similar, they had to be done by the same person."
That statement is not only lame, literally weak and limping, but also lacking in truth. While there are similarities among the cases, there are striking differences as well.
Stine would have never been attributed to Z if he hadn’t mailed the letter with the souvenir he had collected.

QFT.

How about Lake Berryessa with no car door or living witnesses?

________________

smithy
Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:25 am

How about with no writing on the car door, and no "there was a strange symbol on his chest" sentence?

________________

tahoe27
Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:47 am

That’s what I meant about living witnesses. Had Bryan not decribed the circle-cross…

_________________

Jem
Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:13 am

And he seemed to be quite sure what it looked like when he described it in the interview the following day. Doesn’t seem at all like he had been/was being coached. The car door? Maybe I could buy that if not for Bryan’s description. That’s a big sticking point, at least for me, Smithy. Bryan says he’d been checking out the guy closely. And he had very good recall for the whole crime and what happened after the masked guy left, as well.

Maybe you want to argue that the idea had been suggested to him sometime before the interview? Could be, except that Bryan Hartnell doesn’t seem at all the suggestible type. (Unless the anesthesiologist was whispering in his ear, "Cross-hair symbol on the bib, cross-hair symbol on the bib…", during the surgery. Nope.)

I can – in fact, maybe do – believe that the guy who attacked Bryan and Cecelia was not the guy who wrote on the door. But that the car door writer did not either witness the crime or at least know about the symbol the attacker was wearing – that I can’t buy. So if it wasn’t the same guy, he had to be involved in the crime in some capacity.

__________________

smithy
Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:20 am

tahoe27 wrote:
That’s what I meant about living witnesses. Had Bryan not decribed the circle-cross…
I know. It’s just that one thing, isn’t it.

Jem – it’s fishy. That’s about as far as I can ever get.

_________________