For years uninformed amateurs have contradicted Richard Walter’s wealthy, power-assertive profile of Zodiac. The profile serves to greatly winnow down the number of viable suspects in the case to a scant few. Amateur investigators have freely regaled us with their "profiles" of the killer, even though, as amateurs, they have no clue nor any theoretical/research-based foundation for their claims. Most say that Z was a "sexual killer" or a "sexual sadist" and a "loser." Some of these profiles have found their way into books. But as more professional profilers weigh in (except John Douglas, who is lower on the profiling pecking order than Walter), like Mary Ellen O’Toole, who mused that you do not see any emotion or anger, such as beating and battering of the victims, in the Zodiac murders, a clear picture of Zodiac as a non-sexual killer is emerging. Mr. Walter equates beatings with sexual crimes. Here is a quote from my book,

"In addition to the above facts, Mr. Walter pointed out that absent from the Zodiac attacks are the types of injuries typical of sexual crimes—beating, strangulation, recreational cutting/picquerism (i.e., probing knife play that which is not needed to effect death), and percussive injury. This once again points away from a sexual killer."

So the crime scene evidence says that Z killed for power, not for sex or out of anger. And that he was certainly no sadist.

My suspect is not made to fit the facts. The facts fit my suspect.

Mike,

Can you say something about how often Walter and other profilers get it right? Naturally such information will be skewed by which cases are actually solved, but might still be valuable.

For years uninformed amateurs have contradicted Richard Walter’s wealthy, power-assertive profile of Zodiac. The profile serves to greatly winnow down the number of viable suspects in the case to a scant few. Amateur investigators have freely regaled us with their "profiles" of the killer, even though, as amateurs, they have no clue nor any theoretical/research-based foundation for their claims. Most say that Z was a "sexual killer" or a "sexual sadist" and a "loser." Some of these profiles have found their way into books. But as more professional profilers weigh in (except John Douglas, who is lower on the profiling pecking order than Walter), like Mary Ellen O’Toole, who mused that you do not see any emotion or anger, such as beating and battering of the victims, in the Zodiac murders, a clear picture of Zodiac as a non-sexual killer is emerging. Mr. Walter equates beatings with sexual crimes. Here is a quote from my book,

"In addition to the above facts, Mr. Walter pointed out that absent from the Zodiac attacks are the types of injuries typical of sexual crimes—beating, strangulation, recreational cutting/picquerism (i.e., probing knife play that which is not needed to effect death), and percussive injury. This once again points away from a sexual killer."

So the crime scene evidence says that Z killed for power, not for sex or out of anger. And that he was certainly no sadist.

My suspect is not made to fit the facts. The facts fit my suspect.

I agree with some of the power-assertive description. The killings clearly were not sexual in nature. I don’t believ the Zodiac was some complete loser, drooling psychopath, or Norman Bates-esque mama’s boy.

One of the things that stands out to me is the execution of the crimes themselves. They are amateurish and opportunistic at best. KQ was a fighter pilot, a racer, and all-around risk taker. How do you explain a man in his 40s with his resume arching from shooting kids in the back to stabbing people in broad daylight in costume?

Also, by 1970 his empire was vast. BMC was selling well over 100k cars per year and he was beginning to manufacture cars as well as sell them. Would he have had the time to break away on the weekend?

Hi,

KQ basically asked me the same question about not having time to be Zodiac. However, he did not start designing cars for Jensen until after April 1970, when he purchased the company. Ironically to your point, while KQ was busy negotiating for Jensen early in 1970 there were no Zodiac letters from December 1969 until April 20, 1970. He purchased Jensen in early April 1970. Then a little while later, the letters start again.

He basically said to me that he was "too busy" in those days to be Zodiac. I didn’t think of the answer I should have given him that day until much later but that answer is, You can always find the time to do the things you really want to do.

Throughout 1969 (when the actual murders happened), the focus of the press was squarely on KQ’s horse-related activities.

The Robyn Smith saga came and went during the lull between LHR and BRS. It was otherwise a quiet year by his standards.

It’s possibly been discussed at sometime over the past 20 years, but I’ve recently noticed that the L.A. Times letter was postmarked from Pleasanton, 4 days before Silky Sullivan’s appearance at the Alameda County Fairgrounds in Pleasanton.

Typically, the papers would announce the horse’s journey from KQ’s Napa ranch days in advance. I have no clue how much personal involvement, if any, KQ had in that stuff, or if it required him to be there 3-4 days before the Times letter was mailed, but I’m kind of embarrassed it took me this long to make the connection.

(EDIT– Misinfo! Golden Gate Fields! Not the Fairgrounds!)

Hi,

I cover this in my book but many horses that raced at the Solano Fairgrounds racetrack, including many of Qvale’s I am sure, worked out at the track in Pleasanton. Qvale had a ranch but no workout oval in Oakville. The late Solano Superior Court judge Eric Uldall pointed out to me in 2001 that the fastest way to Pleasanton from the fairgrounds in the 1960s was to take LHR. So even if he did not have to be in Pleasanton four days prior to the appearance, he may have gone down there for other reasons.

Do you have a reference for the Silky March 1971 appearance at Pleasanton? I was not even aware of it!

Mike

Hoo boy! Nope. After tearing my hair out for the last 15 minutes, it would appear that I somehow mixed up Golden Gate Fields with the Alameda County Fairgrounds (or a writer did). Which is weird, because I already knew about GGF and had seen those articles a million times…I’ll have to audit my mess of files here. At least it led to an informative discussion about Pleasanton.

It bothers me that KQ flew off to England just a few weeks before Zodiac sent a letter with "AIR MAIL" scrawled across the envelope, so actually placing him in Pleasanton at the time of the letter would make a dandy bookend, but as you point out, it wouldn’t be unusual for him to be there.

Then again a car enthusiast who also happened to be a devious killer probably wouldn’t drive around in a high end car when he did his thing. More likely that he picked up a functioning wreck somewhere which he could ditch after the deed. I think Z might have done the latter – or something close to it – regardless of who he was. He depended on cars for his getaway at three of four murder scenes, as far as we know (and he may have depended on one after Stine too). I think he made sure not to use the same car. Too risky and easy enough to avoid for someone who didn’t kill more often than Z did – even if he wasn’t…a car dealer!

I have been thinking about this very fact for a long period of time. Mr X had unlimited access to innumerable autos. He had the opportunity therefore to "borrow" an automobile that could not be traced to him, and would not have used any of his personal vehicles in the commission of a crime. Also race cars have all manner of signs and emblems on their doors. Writing on a car door would not be surprising at all for one involved in auto racing. I don’t think Mr X is the Zodiac but their is some interesting circumstantial evidence for sure.

Well also don’t forget that it appears the Zodiac chased a British sports car at Lake Herman just before the murders were committed. The car was definitely a British sports car because Crow told my friend Jim and Lyndon Lafferty that it was either an mg or Triumph. Plus the girl who bought it was from Napa but living in San Francisco at the time. However. Lundblad never interviewed her and Crow has never revealed her name, so there’s no way to get to the source and find out if she bought the car at British Motor Car Distributors in San Francisco. Cavalli a zodiac at first driving past a British sports car and then doing a double taking backing up would make perfect sense.

The other thing is that in Qvale’s autobiography there is an aerial picture of his farm from Oakville that shows a car very much resembling a white Chevy sitting on the property. Like I said before, it’s possible that Qvale. could have kept old junkers on the farm for his help to use and for going into town for supplies. And by town I mean Napa. Qvale obviously would have had access to all manner of different trade ins from his car dealership.

Before I get to the cons I’d just like to thank UKspycatcher and Norse for what they added to this thread. Also like to thank Morf for getting the SS application, when all of us KQ people were to cheap to buy it. I feel like I’m giving an award speech with all the shout outs, but you all are a great help.

Also want to say I am a little bias and therefore my cons will come with a few caveats.

1. Age and weight of KQ do not fit Z’s description. However, KQ looked much younger than he was at the time and you can always disguise yourself to look bigger if you need to.

2. DNA is not a matc. On the other hand there is a very good chance LE botched the DNA.

3. It is difficult to explain how KQ could have murdered Stine, walked a few blocks, disposed of his disguise, cleaned off blood, put his dog on a leash, all in that small window of time.

4. Motive. It is hard to understand why someone who seemingly has it all and is living the American dream would put it all in jeopardy for no apparent reason.

5. On a personal level, I have to ask myself do I think KQ was Z because I want KQ to be Z. Let’s face it, if that turned out to be the case this would be the greatest mystery story ever told. No fiction writer could come up with a more fascinating ending.

Do I think there’s enough evidence to arrest KQ if he were alive? No, but it’s enough to keep me wondering.

Also, Norse, just to add to what you said about how he couldn’t remember where he was that night, he was very evasive with Mike R about that, claiming he was most likely in London, but had conveniently lost his passport. So, how he manipulated Mike is yet another pro in my book.

No one ever would have arrested Qvale. First of all, Mike does not put forth a case the prove KQ was Zodiac. He puts forth a case to identify KQ as the killer of Paul Stine. There is nothing to connect him to any of the other murders. Even if you could prove Qvale killed Stine, you could not charge him with the other murders without specific evidence. As to Stine, had all three PS witnesses had identified KQ in 2003 as the guy the say cleaning up the cab in October of 1969, I think SFPD opens an investigation and convenes a grand jury (assuming KQ had no airtight alibi). I am not sure what a grand jury would do with 40-year-old identifications.

I would add a few cons:
– KQ evidently had no cryptography training or interest in cryptography.
– KQ’s handwriting looked nothing like the Zodiac letters.
– Rodelli can show that KQ used monarch stationary in the 90s. But he has no evidence that he used Monarch stationary in the 1960s or 70s.
– KQ cooperated with Rodelli and ABC. That does not sound like something that a guilty party would do.
– KQ would have been 50 at the time of the Stine murder. But he gives no indication of being a killer prior to that time. Serial killers rarely start killing in their late 40s. I would expect to see a trail of unsolved murders following KQ throughout his life.
– The same factors that Rodelli cites for why KQ stopped killing also would seem to prevent him from forming the desire to kill in the first place.
– KQ does not appear to have a background that would allow him to draw what others have said are functional bomb diagrams.

Hi-

Z had a slow manner of speaking. One suspect in the Napa police files was eliminated because he spoke too fast. In an old article about KQ’s dealership, the author suddenly remarks out of the blue (i.e., because it was so noticeable) about how slowly KQ spoke. This was WELL before 1969.

Mike

If only KQ was the only guy in SF to speak slowly in the late 60s and early 70s!

Hi-

I was skeptical about profiling myself until Walter said that Z was a power-assertive killer and he started naming the traits that fall under that umbrella. Aloofness, condescension, superiority, the need to tell someone about his crimes, etc. All of them fit precisely with what people had been saying about z for years. The profile nails Z trait for trait.

Mike

But other profilers will disagree. John Douglas would come up with a completely different profile for Z. That’s why a profile is just an opinion.

Hi-

It’s stereotyping to say he would have had a pronounced Norwegian accent in 1969. He came to this country at the age of 10 in 1929, so he had been an American for 40 years by 1969. This is just another way to erode and undermine the possibility he was z. I have a tape of his voice from 1975 and he has no "Norwegian accent" whatsoever.

However…an article from as far back as 1958 states that he had a "slow" manner of speaking.

Mike

If I say, John speaks "fast" what does that mean? What does it mean to say that Qvale spoke slowly? The concepts of fast and slow are relative to the hearer. It is helpful to know that Qvale speaks slowly. However, you would need to know what the Zodiac witnesses meant by that. Did you ever interview Hartnell? Ever thought to play a clip of Qvale’s voice for him? I don’t think he could identify it positively, but he might be able to exclude it.

Hartnell used the word drawl to describe Z’s voice, specifying it wasn’t a southern drawl. I think the word he was looking for was drone, which is more of a slow, almost hypnotic way of speaking, which is definitely the way KQ speaks in that ad.

MM, how many people fitting the power-assertive profile wrote a letter to The Chronicle warning that if they keep up their sensationalist reporting there would be bloodshed in his neighborhood, before Z entered the picture? If you think Z is someone like KQ,I’m having a hard time understanding what is keeping you from the leap to think it was KQ. While the power-assertive profile fits with both Z and KQ, I don’t think it’s the most compelling pro.

Is a sample size of one enough to conclude that KQ’s editorial letter was similar in tone to Zodiac’s writing? How long was KQ’s letter to the editor, a paragraph? Come on! I would not completely rule KQ out, but the evidence linking him to the entire body of Zodiac crimes is scant. He was a block from Stine’s murder scene, but because he lived in the neighborhood. For all I know, he heard sirens and walked outside to investigate. There is nothing unusual about that.