<<Actually I corrected my post to state that "Based on public posts from Tom V. and Morf, apparently it may be the case that new (2021) DNA info provides more and even stronger links between the Bates murder and Zodiac.">>
ANY DNA profiled would only be the biggest breakthrough in the history of the case. So far we’re not there.
<<IIRC at one point in February 2021 Tom V shifted Cheri Jo Bates from being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim to a "Definite" Zodiac victim. But now Tom Voigt’s site has Bates back to being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim.>>
My guess would be Tom considers it unlikely Gaikowski would have flown from Albany to Riverside for the weekend and committed the crime.
<<IIRC at one point in February 2021 Tom V shifted Cheri Jo Bates from being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim to a "Definite" Zodiac victim. But now Tom Voigt’s site has Bates back to being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim.>>
My guess would be Tom considers it unlikely Gaikowski would have flown from Albany to Riverside for the weekend and committed the crime.
It could be that Tom was asked to keep the information secret.
<<IIRC at one point in February 2021 Tom V shifted Cheri Jo Bates from being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim to a "Definite" Zodiac victim. But now Tom Voigt’s site has Bates back to being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim.>>
My guess would be Tom considers it unlikely Gaikowski would have flown from Albany to Riverside for the weekend and committed the crime.
Seriously ? And you wonder why he has not replied, I can understand why he would be reluctant to do so as what ever he says will not please some people. He is privy to information that we are not, He has taken time to cultivate and solidify these relationship. Credit where credits due he has earned the trust and respect of LE, he has seen things which none of us have seen, you may not agree with him but I honestly am beyond caring. If he replies fair enough, but we are not entitled to his answer one way or another. Backbiting will only exasperated the situation, this has frequently occurred in the past so let’s not let it happen again. Surely we all want to same thing ??
Instead of taking digs why don’t we give Tom a chance to clarify.
<<IIRC at one point in February 2021 Tom V shifted Cheri Jo Bates from being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim to a "Definite" Zodiac victim. But now Tom Voigt’s site has Bates back to being listed as a "Possible" Zodiac victim.>>
My guess would be Tom considers it unlikely Gaikowski would have flown from Albany to Riverside for the weekend and committed the crime.
Also this is nonsensical, why would it be beneficial to distance Gaikowski from the Riverside attack based on the above. DNA is not ambiguous, it either matches or doesn’t (assuming DNA is present). If it matches then Gaikowski then he Would have had to “flown from Albany to Riverside for the weekend and committed the crime.” If it doesn’t then Riverside has nothing to do with Zodiac, so the comment is irrelevant?
You’re combining two topics and confusing yourself.
There is zero evidence so far that any Zodiac-case or Riverside-case DNA has been procured.
If Tom moved Riverside from an official to a possible Zodiac crime, my guess is he can’t justify Gaikowski having flown in for the weekend and committed it. Nothing to do with DNA.
You’re combining two topics and confusing yourself.
There is zero evidence so far that any Zodiac-case or Riverside-case DNA has been procured.
If Tom moved Riverside from an official to a possible Zodiac crime, my guess is he can’t justify Gaikowski having flown in for the weekend and committed it. Nothing to do with DNA.
Apologies obviously I am confused, I mistakenly thought that a thread devoted to “DNA” was discussing DNA, my bad.
You obviously know more than most in regards to DNA as you state that “ There is zero evidence so far that any Zodiac-case or Riverside-case DNA has been procured”, I’m interested to hear your source for this ?
Tom may have changed his stance on Rivrrside for any number of reasons, to imply that it was influenced by his views on an individual, I feel, is disrespectful. I doubt that somebody would completely change their stance which they had previously vigorously promoted due to what you are hypothesising.
Well, a reply he made to me a couple weeks ago seems to indicate that he still thinks she’s a confirmed victim. Unless something changed in the last 2 weeks.
And his argument has always been that "Bates not a Zodiac victim" was Bud Kelly propaganda.
On the Tapatalk forum, Tom said he had moved Bates back to possible victims because he was tired of getting e-mails from noobs about it.
Nah . . . that doesn’t make sense.
On the Tapatalk forum, Tom said he had moved Bates back to possible victims because he was tired of getting e-mails from noobs about it.
What are you guy’s talking about ? I just checked Tom’s Tapatalk forum and Cheri Jo Bates is still listed
in the "Definitive zodiac Victims" thread !
On the Tapatalk forum, Tom said he had moved Bates back to possible victims because he was tired of getting e-mails from noobs about it.
What are you guy’s talking about ? I just checked Tom’s Tapatalk forum and Cheri Jo Bates is still listed
in the "Definitive zodiac Victims" thread !
On his site, Bates is listed as a possible victim.
Where?
Thanks, that needs to be fixed. I shall alert the mobile team.
