First time that I read that she had been seen ‘near’ the apartment she suppposed to be living in. ‘Near’ could have been at Paradice Motel..or somewhere else.

Do we know at what time she had been seen with this man? She was seen at the sixth, as far as I know. Somewhere read that she was seen in the evening, is that true? And if so, besides Lake Tahoe beach, have there been any other locations ‘near’ her apartment to stay at in the evening? Tahoe?

QT

Didn’t the "Pines" card gave the hotel or some address that had something to do with Lass, which was the reason why anyone thought that it was her in the first place?

What I’m getting at is that information was not in this article, so if indeed the card did refer to Lass and had that info, the author would have had to have gotten it some other way.

Being vague and non-specific would be beneficial in the event that Donna was found and the incident was determined not to have involved Zodiac. Zodiac at that point could have relayed that the Lass disappearance was not the crime he was referring to in his card.

Which was unlike Zodiac. He very much liked offering his proof of who it was he killed..in his written hand.

The FK-Crackproof card, the HC card and this Pines card are all the same way. Vague and no handwriting. Gives them all some leeway. Yet, he jumped all over the Kathleen Johns story while being quite descriptive.

Was it though?

These are all very good points and I agree with them but I’m wondering about them from a slightly different angle. The vague approach absolutely works well as suggested, a fail safe. The use of the word ‘sought’ even adds to that IMO.

He DOES love to go into detail about what he HAS done, as T says, but I feel there are examples, beyond the disputed trio of the HC, FK and Pines cards where he does use vagueness.

"Des July Aug Sept Oct = 7"
"This is the Zodiac speaking up to the end of Oct I have killed 7 people"
"…ninth and possibly tenth victim"

After that little bout of non specifics I find it interesting that he adds, on the amended bus bomb diagram. "Ps. I hope you have fun trying to figgure [sic] out who I killed"

That suggests to me he was very much aware of the vagueness of this information. In fact I don’t half wonder if he didn’t shoot himself in the foot here (terrible, or maybe not, analogy). If you are reading this information and you are trying to ‘figgure’ out "who did he kill?" you are going to realise that’s there’s no reference to No.8. Vague or otherwise.

I think he realised that too in seeing his letters in the papers and or re-reading his own copies. He had to keep score right? Whether or not it was real I don’t think he was that good at it or at least, not very precise. I suspect it was because it WAS and WASN’T real. Some were his kills, some misdirection claims and some his ‘work’ but not actual kills (reflected in the totting up by the crosshair numbers).

Just over two months after the amended bus bomb challenge he sticks this one in seemingly apropo nothing.

"I shot a man sitting in a parked car with a .38"

I think that could be our No.8. An attempt to maintain some semblance of a chronology. I also see it as a precedent for his sloppiness in this area and rather than being a reason as to why certain communications don’t ‘fit’ it might actually be a hint as to why they could.

And we’ve seen before where people will discount an entire communication from Z, based on the way he did one letter, one time, in that letter. When if it’s a copy cat he’s going to make sure he does every letter to the best of his ability just as Z would do it. Otherwise it defeats the copycats purpose. I like the info Morf has found regarding a Dr. Adams…..Whether it proves to be actually Z related, or not, I guess time will tell, but it’s a great find none the less.

Right, and that is why the sender of the Pines card needed to cut & paste out of newspaper articles and provided as little handwriting as possible…because he sucked at it.

Didn’t the "Pines" card gave the hotel or some address that had something to do with Lass, which was the reason why anyone thought that it was her in the first place?

What I’m getting at is that information was not in this article, so if indeed the card did refer to Lass and had that info, the author would have had to have gotten it some other way.

Nope. Had nothing to do with Lass, nor was it anywhere near where she lived and worked.

First time that I read that she had been seen ‘near’ the apartment she suppposed to be living in. ‘Near’ could have been at Paradice Motel..or somewhere else.

Do we know at what time she had been seen with this man? She was seen at the sixth, as far as I know. Somewhere read that she was seen in the evening, is that true? And if so, besides Lake Tahoe beach, have there been any other locations ‘near’ her apartment to stay at in the evening? Tahoe?

QT

If I’m not mistaken, the person who saw her had their date wrong. We know for a fact she worked that evening.

Plenty of places to stay then. South Lake Tahoe was more "happening" then then it is now. She was to meet her friend after she got off work, so she had changed her clothes and was waiting there at the Sahara and she and her friend were to return to her apartment. This is why Donna left her car at home.

Being vague and non-specific would be beneficial in the event that Donna was found and the incident was determined not to have involved Zodiac. Zodiac at that point could have relayed that the Lass disappearance was not the crime he was referring to in his card.

Which was unlike Zodiac. He very much liked offering his proof of who it was he killed..in his written hand.

The FK-Crackproof card, the HC card and this Pines card are all the same way. Vague and no handwriting. Gives them all some leeway. Yet, he jumped all over the Kathleen Johns story while being quite descriptive.

Was it though?

These are all very good points and I agree with them but I’m wondering about them from a slightly different angle. The vague approach absolutely works well as suggested, a fail safe. The use of the word ‘sought’ even adds to that IMO.

He even get the "sought" count wrong and it doesn’t jibe. The Pines card wasn’t mailed. Just so many things that are too off the mark for me…to each his own, but I think it’s apparent why this card, and Donna Lass have never been officially confirmed as being from/by Zodiac.

While the Pines card may very well have been dropped off by her killer, to me, this article provided a faker the perfect opportunity to make something up.

Isn’t that place pictured on the card today, a time share? We were on a time share weekend a few years back, they put us up at the Horizon, did their 2 hr. presentation then drove us out on the highway, we turned left out of the Horizon, went maybe 3-5 miles, turned left on a road headed towards the Lake and then it wound around and there was the time share. It looks identical to the picture on the postcard. I’ll try to find exactly where we were on a map and what road we took to get there.

The key to me isn’t the card, it’s the phone call……

Isn’t that place pictured on the card today, a time share? We were on a time share weekend a few years back, they put us up at the Horizon, did their 2 hr. presentation then drove us out on the highway, we turned left out of the Horizon, went maybe 3-5 miles, turned left on a road headed towards the Lake and then it wound around and there was the time share. It looks identical to the picture on the postcard. I’ll try to find exactly where we were on a map and what road we took to get there.

The key to me isn’t the card, it’s the phone call……

It was the Forest Pines Condominiums in Incline Village on the North Shore of Lake Tahoe. Takes about 40 minutes to get there from South Shore.

Did anyone ever investigate to find out who the young blonde man was Donna was seen walking with the day before she disappeared? What was she wearing? Who saw them and what were the circumstances?

This man could have been just a neighbor and introducing himself to Donna since she’d just moved there.

The other blond man I remember reading about somewhere worked at the hotel but are these two separate blond men or the same one? If anyone knows?

Did anyone ever investigate to find out who the young blonde man was Donna was seen walking with the day before she disappeared? What was she wearing? Who saw them and what were the circumstances?

This man could have been just a neighbor and introducing himself to Donna since she’d just moved there.

The other blond man I remember reading about somewhere worked at the hotel but are these two separate blond men or the same one? If anyone knows?

You will almost certainly find that answer here cap. Sorry I can’t give you a more direct reference (still not ocular functional) but perhaps one of the other mods can. While you’re waiting have a browse.

viewforum.php?f=35

Did anyone ever investigate to find out who the young blonde man was Donna was seen walking with the day before she disappeared? What was she wearing? Who saw them and what were the circumstances?

This man could have been just a neighbor and introducing himself to Donna since she’d just moved there.

The other blond man I remember reading about somewhere worked at the hotel but are these two separate blond men or the same one? If anyone knows?

I believe the one seen walking with Donna was reported by a woman who saw Donna’s photo in the newspaper. No way to know for sure if it was actually Donna and/or if it was the security guard who worked out the hotel…which I doubt because he was very tall and I would imagine that would have been pointed out by the woman who reported seeing her.

Donna was only at her place one night, although it still could have been a friend of hers….if it was her.