A simple question for people here that have researched Gaikowski.

1- Was he ever observed shooting guns, or was he known to use guns,did he own them etc??? I asked this before, and somebody mentioned something like "well he was previously in the military so knew how to shoot,or had received training in shooting". That’s not really an answer. Just because somebody once fired a gun in the military, doesn’t really mean much, and doesn’t show an ongoing connection with guns,which Z clearly had….multiple guns that he used.

2- Did Gaikowski own a car at the time of the Zodiac murders?

These are two pretty basic questions, that I haven’t seen answered, or perhaps,I missed them. Zodiac demonstrated that he had a car,and owned or had access to multiple guns. I think the best suspects should also meet these requirements.

If Zodiac’s guns were all obtained under the counter or by some other shady means, like he claims they were, it stands to reason that he would not publicly admit to owning any of them, much less shoot them in public when he was not murdering people. I think it’s pretty likely that Zodiac ditched every single weapon he used shortly after each murder. The knife he used at Berryessa he may actually even have flung out into the lake while he fled the scene.

The second question is more relevant. It would be interesting to see what kind of car the guy drove at the time, if any at all. I wonder if DMV records go back that far.

If Zodiac’s guns were all obtained under the counter or by some other shady means, like he claims they were, it stands to reason that he would not publicly admit to owning any of them, much less shoot them in public when he was not murdering people. I think it’s pretty likely that Zodiac ditched every single weapon he used shortly after each murder. The knife he used at Berryessa he may actually even have flung out into the lake while he fled the scene.

The second question is more relevant. It would be interesting to see what kind of car the guy drove at the time, if any at all. I wonder if DMV records go back that far.

I sort of agree with some of the stuff you said. He could have purchased guns undr the table,kept it quiet. But a guy like Z would have shot the guns at ranges,etc. Many times, Friends & Buddies shoot together, etc. Guns are expensive,I highly doubt that Zodiac would throw the gun away after each attack. The only way I could see him getting rid of the guns is if he suspected the police were onto him,and he wanted to ditch everything.

The cars questions are indeed valid. We know Zodiac didn’t take cabs t the crime scenes,well,that is except for the Stine murder.

Why do people constantly employ this reverse "logic"? There is no evidence that he ever owned or fired a gun, therefor we should conclude that he is trying to hide the fact that he owned guns. And because he was trying to hide that he owned guns, therefor he must have used them for illicit purposes.

Every thing that is a negative just further proves the positive.

It’s the same thing with cars that Graysmith said about Allen. He didn’t own the car seen by the witness That proves that he borrowed the car from a friend. Anyone who knows anyone that owned a current model Chevy or GMC car should be added to the suspect list.

In Gaikowski’s case because he was associated with the radical left, I could see him using another person’s gun or getting a "hot" gun. He did have friends that were Weathermen and Black Panthers. Would someone in those groups even begin to connect him to being a killer? Also, during the time of Zodiac’s killings military bases and weapons depots were being ripped off for both guns and bomb making supplies. That is where the Panthers and the BLA got some of their guns. Actually the same scenario could hold true for any Zodiac suspect.

He did have friends that were Weathermen and Black Panthers. Would someone in those groups even begin to connect him to being a killer?

My guess is that even if they did connect him to the Zodiac murders, they wouldn’t have given a damn.

"He could have borrowed a gun" and he "could have borrowed a car", all sound like trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole.

I don’t want to discourage anybody from looking at Gaikowski,or any other suspect of their choosing,but I wonder if it makes more sense to look closer at people that DEFINITELY were known to drive a car and shoot guns. Again, Gaik being involved in the newspaper field, GYKE(although not the way Gaik spelled his nickname)in the cipher,and the fact he was in Albany as was Darlene Ferrin,are all interesting. His general description is similar to Z. But I can’t ignore the apparent lack of a car, the lack of being a confirmed gun user or shooter, and the total lack of a writing match. Also, he claims he was out of the country when the LHR murders happened,yet,nobody has been able to disprove that. Again, I guess all of us consider different things in a suspect to be important,but in my book, with all the attention shed on this guy over the years, if there was anything to connect him to the crimes, police would have already done so. This guy goes into the Arthur Leigh Allen file along with guys like Zode from San Bernardino, interesting on paper,but simply nothing at all connecting them to the crime.

If there was anything to connect him to the crimes, police would have already done so.

There’s the thing, morf – the cops gave him only the most cursory of look-overs, just because his accuser was a kook. At least with Allen, they bothered to properly look into him – ran his prints, obtained handwriting, executed search warrants and what-not. Nothing of the sort was done for Gaikowski.

If there was anything to connect him to the crimes, police would have already done so.

There’s the thing, morf – the cops gave him only the most cursory of look-overs, just because his accuser was a kook. At least with Allen, they bothered to properly look into him – ran his prints, obtained handwriting, executed search warrants and what-not. Nothing of the sort was done for Gaikowski.

Sorry,I can’t believe that none of that stuff was fed to SFPD or presented by others such as Tom V, and people that had ‘connections’ within PD. They have to have looked him over. Too many people have been high on Gaikowski, and contacted the police trying to get DNA tests done,etc. Gaikowski has an arrest record,no? Somebody after all this time and all the accusations has not passed that along to SFPD,so they could check his prints? I think it’s more likely that they looked him over and ruled him out.

To me, morf, Narlow’s vague, hazy testimony regarding the investigation into Gaikowski tells a very different story. The fact that he could not state one way or the other if he ever conclusively ruled Gaikowski out strongly leads me to believe that nothing concrete was ever done; that nobody took the allegations against Gaikowski seriously on account of who the accuser was.

Remind me where he was arrested again, and by whom? If it was by a police department other than Napa or SFPD and if the arrest took place away from the Bay Area, then I would not be surprised at all if no-one bothered to liase regarding prints and so on.

To me, morf, Narlow’s vague, hazy testimony regarding the investigation into Gaikowski tells a very different story. The fact that he could not state one way or the other if he ever conclusively ruled Gaikowski out strongly leads me to believe that nothing concrete was ever done; that nobody took the allegations against Gaikowski seriously on account of who the accuser was.

Remind me where he was arrested again, and by whom? If it was by a police department other than Napa or SFPD and if the arrest took place away from the Bay Area, then I would not be surprised at all if no-one bothered to liase regarding prints and so on.

You will have to verify the arrest details with the Gaikowski supporters. Narlow told me that there was really nothing to Gaikowski as a suspect but allegedly later told Tom V that he may have been at the ‘painting party’. I think any hard investigating of Gaikowski occurred AFTER Narlow was retired.

He told me a similar thing. I am not trying to claim it’s not true because I have no idea at all but Tom did say to me going back a while now that the admission was made in a death bed confession scenario. I will admit I found that a rather odd thing to be on your mind as your death is imminent. But as I said, no reason to claim Tom is not being honest, I post this merely as a further detail to Morf’s statement.

Question, I have read that Gaikowski hit a pedestrian on his first day of driving a taxi. Does anyone know if this is true? If so, was the pedestrian killed or just injured? Thank you,

But a guy like Z would have shot the guns at ranges,etc.

With all due respect, I see no evidence that zodiac shot regularly at ranges. Nothing he did makes me think he was skilled with a gun.