What REALLY gets me about that 1978 letter is the lack of needed punctuation and capitalization, the run-on sentences, and the bad grammar. Despite Z’s misspellings, he normally wrote quite well. But this one starts:

"This is the Zodiac speaking I am back with you."

The REAL Zodiac would have included a period, and it would have been two sentences!

Honestly, I think that if there ever was a "copycat" letter meant to mimic Z’s handwriting and style, this one is it. But it fails miserably, IMO. This is not an authentic Zodiac letter.

-glurk

Edit to add – Why is "herb caen" all lowercase? Why is "toschi" all lowercase? Why is the "K" in speaKing uppercase? etc, etc., etc… Because it is a fake, and a poor one at that, I say.

Yeah I would say so as well. That’s really why I’m considering/suggesting the above undertaking. It’s always been in the proverbial pipeline to do a ‘comp’ containing the suspect letters but I was just thinking out loud what information would be good to include so that we can see them in the bigger picture and perhaps help us to see just how ‘Zodiac’, Zodiac’s actual letters were.

It’s funny you mention the non capitalization of the names because that struck me as well. Sherwood’s own comments about how ‘well’ Zodiac wrote, for want of a better description always stuck with me. And he did … and he didn’t stick random capitals in the middle of sentences. That drives me nuts when people cite that.

For my own torture though I want to get to the bottom of why Sherwood thought the 78 letter was real, and as a by product hopefully show/discover why it isn’t and consequentially do the same for the rest. Try and bring some closure to our own questions and doubts about them. Save people years down the line wondering if they are or not.

Great idea trav

I think have all the Count Marco collumns in the week up to the Zodiac Count Marco letter, one of those collumns might have provoked Zodiac to write that letter I´ll try find them in my files somtime this week.

Concerning glurk’s questions:

"Why is "herb caen" all lowercase? Why is "toschi" all lowercase? Why is the "K" in speaKing uppercase? etc, etc., etc… Because it is a fake, and a poor one at that, I say."

Here are my thoughts:

Why the capital "K" in "speaKing" ? …Zodiac might have done that to make it say "Zodiac King" (Letter said: This is the Zodiac speaKing ")
Why the herb caen and toschi all in lowecase ?…to degrade those two persons, add to that he made himself King in the very first sentence,
and add to that the fact that he in his last sentence wrote "I am now in control of all things" kind of make himself God due to that is something you normaly say about God.

Great idea trav

I think have all the Count Marco collumns in the week up to the Zodiac Count Marco letter, one of those collumns might have provoked Zodiac to write that letter I´ll try find them in my files somtime this week.

Concerning glurk’s questions:

"Why is "herb caen" all lowercase? Why is "toschi" all lowercase? Why is the "K" in speaKing uppercase? etc, etc., etc… Because it is a fake, and a poor one at that, I say."

Here are my thoughts:

Why the capital "K" in "speaKing" ? …Zodiac might have done that to make it say "Zodiac King" (Letter said: This is the Zodiac speaKing ")
Why the herb caen and toschi all in lowecase ?…to degrade those two persons, add to that he made himself King in the very first sentence,
and add to that the fact that he in his last sentence wrote "I am now in control of all things" kind of make himself God due to that is something you normaly say about God.

And the sentence "Tell herb caen I am here I have always been here"

is IMO a rewriting from the bible, God saying: I AM THE ONE WHO IS, WHO ALWAYS WAS

“‘I AM THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA—THE BEGINNING AND THE END,’ SAYS THE LORD GOD.

‘I AM THE ONE WHO IS, WHO ALWAYS WAS, AND WHO IS STILL TO COME—THE ALMIGHTY ONE.’”
~REVELATION 1-8~

IMO In this letter Zodiac is simply establishing himself as a God/King

And… in the July 19, 1978, possible Zodiac letter, the writer continues with, among other things, the "in control" thing.
he open up with it, and he end with it:

http://zodiackillertruth.com/control.htm

Date: July 19, 1978
Mailed From: Los Angeles, CA
Sent To: San Francisco Chronicle

Typewritten letter:

I am the ZODIAC and I am in control of all things. I am going to tell you a secret. I like friction tape. I like to have it around in case I need to truss someone up in a hurry….I have my real name on a small metallic tape. You see, while you have it in your possession, I want you to know it belongs to me and you think I may have left it accidentally. I am athletic. It could be swim fins, or a piece of scuba gear. But maybe you play chess with me. I have several cheap sets in closets all over. I have my name on the bottom of the lid with the scotch tape….My tape is waiting for me all over California. Do you know me? I am the ZODIAC and I am in control.

Back in June 2010 I posted this thoughts on the July 19, 1978 letter:

http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/forum/ … d&start=10

If it was Zodiac who wrote the Cheri Jo Bates "The Confession" letter (which I belive it was), which was typed and Z´s first letter, posted in southern california, maybe Zodiac concidered the "I Am In Control of All Things" his very last letter, ment to close his Zodiac "era", and he wanted that last letter to be typed, and sent from southern California, just like the first letter?

Additionally, 1978 was the 12th year anniversery of the 1966 first letter
12 like in 12 zodiac signs?

Wish we knew if the "I Am In Control of All Things" letter was typed all in caps like "The Confession letter"

A poster nickamed Mathew replyed to my post:

http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/forum/ … 1&start=20
"This is reflected in the structure of the letter, which also is a rondo, beginning and ending with ‘I am the ZODIAC and I am in control’. Intended or not, it’s beautiful."

"Mathew" also posted this:

"The rondo structure is rather obvious. As i can not post a table in this post, a made a little list here:
http://zodiac-zenter.angelfire.com/

A rondo resembles a circle, which fits to the zodiac sign (I don’t think this is more than a coincidence)."

Personaly I belive, for several reasons, that BOTH 1978, April 24 & July 19, letters were from the Zodiac killer.
One reason, among many, is that Morrill was 100% convinced that the April 24, 1978 letter was written by the Zodiac killer.

Great idea trav

I think have all the Count Marco collumns in the week up to the Zodiac Count Marco letter, one of those collumns might have provoked Zodiac to write that letter I´ll try find them in my files somtime this week.

Concerning glurk’s questions:

"Why is "herb caen" all lowercase? Why is "toschi" all lowercase? Why is the "K" in speaKing uppercase? etc, etc., etc… Because it is a fake, and a poor one at that, I say."

Here are my thoughts:

Why the capital "K" in "speaKing" ? …Zodiac might have done that to make it say "Zodiac King" (Letter said: This is the Zodiac speaKing ")
Why the herb caen and toschi all in lowecase ?…to degrade those two persons, add to that he made himself King in the very first sentence,
and add to that the fact that he in his last sentence wrote "I am now in control of all things" kind of make himself God due to that is something you normaly say about God.

I think the K or k (I’m undecided yet) is pronounced the way it is in the 78 letter because it was in part copied from the styling of the Belli letter. It is pronounced in a similar fashion in that letter and I think that is because Z was trying out the styling on it as he wrote it and then gave up near the end. I suspect this also because of the vertical tail on the lowercase a’s in the 78/87 letters. Again something I believe that was copied from the Belli letter because, off the top of my head that is the only place Z used that type of l/c a with the vertical tail.

Now this is where it all gets sketchy. You see as I write this my mind is drifting towards the ‘bleeding’ knife letter with it’s pronounced k giving the effect of appearing to create two separate words from one word as you suggest/point out in the 78 letter TF. That’s why I think it is about time that I did do something with the unauthenticated letters because there’s possibly a pattern there. Why? I daren’t even speculate.

The other points regarding biblical inspiration TF might have it’s own thread potential. There might be an angle there to explore. I know myself I have in the past wondered about such allusions and posted on them. Most likely buried on the old forum somewhere. I made some suggestions about some things and linked them to Bible passages. I think primarily inspired by the Halloween card with the underlines being 3 sets of 6 or 666 and the layout of the ‘paradice slaves’ reminding me of, and rhyming with, those neon ‘Jesus Saves’ signs.

Zodiac’s Count Marco (Spinelli) Letter
Mailed: July 8, 1974
Postmarked: San Rafael, CA
Sent to: San Francisco Chronicle

I couldn´t find my own Count Marco collumn files, but I found them on a website called Cold Case Investigations the CM collumns posted by "Starless" back in Aug 2008

Count Marco collumns:

http://officialcoldcaseinvestigations.c … php?t=4732

July 1, 1974

COUNT MARCO

YOU WIVE’S DON’T OWN YOUR HUSBANDS

If you’re a do-it-yourself "lawyer". you might believe that possession is nine-tenths of the law, which in far too many cases is not only untrue, but illegal. You may possess a thing or an object and you yourself might even be possessed, as in The Film "The Exorcist".

But you can’t possess another person.

I often overhear wives snapping shrewishly at their husbands:"Will you stop doing that?" "How many times do I have to tell you…. you never listen to me."

You don’t own him you know, just because you married him. He’s an individual and has certain rights over which you should not expect to have any control. He’s also an adult, and no matter how childish you may think he acts, if he wants to behave that way, then leave him alone.

It’s one thing to be concerned about what he does and the impression he makes, but you don’t impove matters by showing disgust. Even within the privacy of your own home, especially before children or relatives, don’t degrade him, or yourself with malicious downgrading of his character.

You may refinish a piece of furniture, move it about at will or even trade it in because you own it. But you must remember that there’s quite a difference between having a man and owning one.

When you begin to think you own him, he will decide to trade you in.

——————–
July 2, 1974

A Chance Of Elegance For Tomorrow

Short hair is back. If the factions which have fought eachother for years can come to an agreement we may yet see the return to elegance for women here and abroad.

For years, milliners and hairdressers have feuded, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Where hairstylists decreed huge bouffant styles the hat makers introduced huge floppy hats to cover them up.

When small hats were unveiled, hairdressers decreed elaborate, heavily sprayed poufs.

Hairdressers usually won the battle because in addition, the price of hats soared.

The first indication that this all may be ending is the introduction this season of a simple, but smart straw or gingham hat with synthetic hair fall attached. You can change the hat or the fall instantly for a new color look.

At a recent fashion show I noted a number of ensembles included hats. I think that hats for women are one of the most necessary, stunning accessories you can wear, not only because of the over-all effect, but an even more important one: They shade your eyes, just enough, so the little tell-tale wrinkles around the eyes are softened.

A word of fashion warning here. If you decide to take my advice and wear hats, don’t affect huge sunglasses. The combination of brimmed hats and big glasses will give you the appearance of being one big glob.

Speaking of glasses, I had cocktails at the airport the other noon with a friend of mine who wore large light-blue sunglasses. It was quite disconcerting to note how much the blue tint highlighted every line around her eyes.

—————————-

July 3, 1974

COUNT MARCO

Your Mirror Can Also See Inside You

When I wrote that psychiatrists and psychologists ruined more marriages than they saved, I wasn’t surprised by the angry reaction.

I have contended that shrinks look at ordinary marriage problems as "cases" to be dissected, rearranged and deranged, leaving the patient totally disoriented.

What would happen if a physician examined a patient and said "you have such and such a disease, now do something about it," without prescribing treatment.

Mother nature is like an oyster. She heals emotional wounds through passage of time. An oyster finds a grain of sand has forced it’s way into the shell. As time goes on it’s mucous continually covers the irritant until eventually what was a sore spot becomes a magnificent pearl.

However, if one instead took a sharp instrument and sliced the pearl in half, the only result would be to expose the original grain of sand, the irritant.

According to a report in The Chronicle, behavioral researchers have shown unmistakably that psychiatry is a very imprecise tool in diagnosing mental illness.

On specific diagnosis (labelling a patient "depressive") psychiatrists can agree among themselves only about 40 percent of the time.

Any couple having problems in their marriage can be considered depressive. Instead of sitting down and saying simply (as he should) "Look you two, Grow up. Marriage is a give and take proposition and one of you is taking too much," the psychiatrist takes your time and money to tell you that because your mother slapped you across the mouth once for talking back, you’ve hated your mother ever since and consequently hate your husband or wife.

The best psychiatric treatment you can have is taking a long truthful look in the mirror and saying honestly to yourself , "Ok, what am I doing wrong?"

Your mirror will tell you, the basic trouble with marriages is too many of you are afraid to face the truth and hope an outsider will agree.

You don’t need psychiatry. All you need is the Count Marco column.

—————————

July 4, 1974

COUNT MARCO

Is Being Called Sexy Degrading?

Did you know that if a company proudly announces to the public that it’s female employees are sexy, it’s considered degrading to it’s employees?

At least that’s what the airline stewardess union is protesting. "It could lead to a spontaneous lack of enthusiasm," said the president of the Association of Flight Attendants.

I guess she honestly believes that such sex-oriented promotions will actually lead male passengers to expect something from stewardesses besides safe, courteous service.

An airplane could advertise, "Our female flight attendants are safe," but if a male passenger asked "Just how safe are you?" he could get his coffee or tea over his head.

If the airlines really want the stewardesses to look safe, they should put them all in mechanic’s overalls.

The flight attendant’s group had it’s feathers ruffled particularly over the airline’s promotion, "We really move our tail for you."

As a multi-million miler, I’m not about to fly any plane that doesn’t move it’s tail.

Besides, if a stewardess can’t handle a flippant male passenger, then I don’t think she’s strong enough to open an emergency door.

—————————

July 5, 1974

COUNT MARCO

Swinging Is Death On Marriage

A female psychologist says men and women still need marriage, but many couples need more than eachother.

I’ll go along with that.

She also says there are an estimated eight million swingers (couples engaged in sexual activities with others) and that it satisfies their needs both for personal freedom and the security of marriage.

Couples do need more interest in their lives, but playing musical beds isn’t one of them.

Swinging is today’s variation of an old theme: The orgy.

And if that’s what satisfies your needs for "personal freedom and the security of marriage", there’s something wrong with you and most certainly wrong with your marriage.

I’ll never cease to be amazed at public opinion.

A woman who is an honest prostitute is doing something illicit and illegal, but when a married woman indulges in swinginging, she’s satisfying her need for "personal freedom and the security of marriage."

You figure that one out.

Husbands have cheated on their wives for centuries, by convincing you to join him, he’s convincing himself he’s not cheating.

In this case, it’s not the cookie that crumbles, it’s your marriage.

———————

tHE Count Marco collumn July 6 & 7 ARE missing
maybe somone could find them?

————–

July 8, 1974 (Same day Zodiac sent his Count Marco letter)

COUNT MARCO

Why Older Men Have Trouble In Bed

A recent TV documentary on the "male menopause" advises that impotence for middle-aged men is psychological, not physiological.

A great difficuly for the male over 40 is that he’s likely to be married to a middle-aged female. You may resent that remark all you want, but it’s true. Too true.

One of the truly great differences between males and females is that as he gets older, he becomes more concerned with his ability as a sex partner. But a woman is more concerned about her family, her home and outside social activities.

To be aroused sexually, he has to be encouraged. But from what he sees sprawled on the other side of his bed, the only thing aroused in him is the DDT’s, Disgust, Despair, and Termination.

It’s true that you can barely flip a page of a magazine or newspaper today without noting ads for male improvement aids such as hair-pieces, face-lifts, creams, stomach cinches. He’s supposed to buy these to help him hold his job. That’s a lot of nonsense. When he looks in the mirror and notices age leaping out at him the first anxiety is about his sexual ability, not his job.

If he looks younger, he feels younger and is thus able to convince himself he can still perform at the drop of a hint.

For how many years now I have warned you women that celebrating your 25th wedding anniversary is not the time to sit back and relax? The dangerous years are not behind you, but ahead of you.

If you’re not getting any sex from him, It’s not because he’s too old or too tired, but because you’ve lost your touch, you’ve lost your sex appeal.

It’s up tp you to rekindle his sexual interest in you. If you don’t, some other woman will.