New to the board. Ted K is certainly the most intriguing suspect to me. I’ve seen a lot of circumstantial evidence in his favor. But even if you support TK = Z, play devils advocate – why isn’t he the zodiac?

For me, his weight is one thing – zodiac was consistently described as a bulky guy. Second, I had zodiac pegged as former military, primarily because of the bootprints. I’ve also read that he may have alibis for some zodiac crimes, although I’ve seen mixed information on that. Finally, I’ve read hes been cleared by LE, but again, mixed messages there as well. What do you have?

Welcome to the board. What evidence do you find most compelling pointing to Ted K as Z?

You state Zodiac was "consistently described as a bulky guy". That is just not true. Ignore the Graysmith distortions trying to incriminate the 250 pound Allen. Instead go to the actual eyewitness descriptions.

None of the eyewitness descriptions describe a man who is 6’0" – 6’2" tall and weighing 250 – 300 pounds.

Mageau said 5’8" – 5’9", 160 pounds, which is similar to what Kathleen Johns and the LB teenage girls said. The SFPD wanted poster also says 5’8".

SFPD Officer Fouke said the 250 pound Allen weighed about "100 pounds" more than the Zodiac he saw that night in SF. (Source: Interview of Fouke in the film "His Name Was Arthur Leigh Allen" attached to the DVD of the David Fincher film "Zodiac". Go to the 31 minute mark of the documentary.)

Officer Fouke said the 250 pound Allen weighed "100 pounds" more than the man he saw. He also said Allen’s face was "too round". Indeed, Allen has a round face with plenty of fat in the face. Compare to the SF sketch, which shows a lean angular face with no fat in it.

As for Z being ex – military because of a bootprint, military shoes and boots were available at garage sales and army – navy surplus stores.

Ted was asked to provide alibis for Zodiac murder and mailing dates and refused. His attorney said such alibi evidence COULD not be provided – not that they would not provide it, but that they could not. See http://www.zodiackillersite.com/viewtop … =102&t=236

Ted K has NOT been "officially cleared" of being Zodiac by the SFPD, the FBI or anyone else. But also remember that Gary Ridgway was "officially cleared" by the police, by police investigation, police interview of witnesses and a polygraph test. Of course DNA later proved that Ridgway was the Green River Killer.

Right after his arrest for the Unabomber crimes, both the SFPD and the FBI did very superficial brief investigations into Ted K as Z. They did not produce much, but neither agency gave a definitive statement "clearing" Ted K as Z. See http://www.zodiackillersite.com/viewtop … 102&t=2891

Since then I can personally state that the SFPD, and other law enforcement agencies, have continued investigations into Ted K for the Zodiac crimes and other 1960’s era gun and knife murders of college coeds, couples and families.

AK,

While there are some discrepancies in the eye witness testimonies, the implication that Zodiac was 150 to 160lbs is just not true. He was consistently described as heavy, beefy, stocky, etc.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ … edit#gid=0

There definitely is a range of descriptions. And height, weight and other descriptions from citizens are notoriously unreliable. Also it can also be influenced by the amount of light, angle, time of day, distance and the questioning by the interviewer and how the interviewer characterizes the responses.

You left out Kathleen Johns, who said 160 lbs, from your chart. You leave out when Mageau said 160 lbs, and for some of the other witnesses you choose recorded answers that were heavier than other answers that they gave that were lighter.

And while your chart includes some estimates of around 185 – 200 lbs, it does not include any estimates in the 250 – 300 lbs area.

Overall, looking at the range of descriptions, it certainly would not be prudent to absolutely rule out someone who weighed 150 – 180 lbs, as there are witnesses who put his weight in that area.

You must also consider that Ted, as the Unabomber, when going into public places took actions to disguise himself. These disguises mainly consisted around trying to make witnesses think he was heavier then he was in reality.

He would wear multiple shirts, put a towel inside of a zipped-up jacket to make it seem that he was much heavier and even put wax or gum in parts of his mouth and nose which also had the effect of making him look heavier.

Remember, it is fairly easy for a 160 lb man to introduce some disguise elements and appeared to weigh 200 lb. It is almost impossible for a 200 lb man to disguise himself as a 160 lb man.

The question of the original poster was did Ted Kaczynski’s weight of 160 lbs totally eliminate him from being a valid Zodiac suspect? I think the answer is clearly that it does not.

Welcome to the board. What evidence do you find most compelling pointing to Ted K as Z?

Thanks. I think the most compelling evidence is the handwriting, the shared interest in letters and ciphers between Z and the unabomber, the fact that Z "retired " and then within a few years the unabomber came about, the fact that Ted K is known to play a "character" or "persona" in his writings, calling himself "freedom club" and pretending to be (and successfully convincing the police that he was) a lower educated blue collar type guy, and the hood from the cabin, the Montana connection, among others.

That being said a lot of suspects have circumstantial evidence against them. So I like to hear the argument of the defense. You’ve given a great case as a prosecutor on this board, and I’ve yet to see anyone provide strong evidence that could rule him out. It seems like a lot of people dismiss him on the notion that its absurd to think the unabomber could also be zodiac. I know you think Ted k is Z – but If you were his defense lawyer, what would your case be?

The three teenagers never described the suspect as 25-30 years – only the October 13th 1969 police sketch did. Their account was comprehensively detailed in the police report countersigned by Officer Armond Pelissetti on October 12th 1969. Their viewing of the suspect "last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street" was the only eyewitness testimony in the police report, and therefore the suspect description on page 2 could only have been derived from them. It stated the man was in his early forties. It couldn’t have been from the other two sets of eyewitnesses because the police report clearly states that the suspect was "last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street". The other eyewitnesses viewed the suspect after Cherry Street. This is why they wanted an amended sketch detailing an older Zodiac.

Officer Donald Fouke described the man as 35-45 (therefore a median age of 40) and the Julius Khan playground eyewitnesses described the man running into the park as about 40. Three sets of eyewitnesses pinpointing the Zodiac Killer as 40 years of age or slightly above, within a five minute window.

Ted Kaczynski was 27 in 1969. People who believe Kaczynski was Zodiac will state the lighting was poor, the teenagers were viewing from an angle or were too inexperienced to guage someone’s age, Donald Fouke was in a moving vehicle, and any number of other reasons. But you can bet your bottom dollar that if Kaczynski was 40 in 1969, these witnesses would be heralded and championed by Kaczynski supporters.

the way he writes #4 zodiac very open, ted a triangled 4 just my opinion.

Richard – Yes there are witnesses who estimated Zodiac at 35 – 45. IMO the SFPD wanted poster, the sketch on the right looks like a man 35 – 45, while the sketch on the left depicts a man 25 – 35.

When I said the teenagers, I did not mean the kids in San Francisco. I meant the teenage girls at Lake Berryessa, who saw a suspicious man that may or may not have been the Zodiac. They describe a man who was between the ages of 25 and 35, and looked "average", "normal" and "attractive", with a body like a swimmer.

Mageau said Zodiac looked 25 – 30, and as you point out Ted was 27 at the time.

Kathleen Johns said Zodiac was about 30.

Given the range of age descriptions, I dont think you can conclusively rule out any good suspect on the basis of age, as long as the suspect was between 25 and 45. Allowing for human error and otherfactors, maybe we can safely say the acceptable range is 23 to 47, approximately.

I think we can safely rule out Dr. George Hodel, 62 years old at the time of the Stine murder. That may be the only named Zodiac suspect we could conclusively and safely rule out on the basis of age alone.

Other factors to consider (or not) include the dispatcher saying the voice sounded young, like a "student".

Then you can factor in (or not) that the wider age estimate for the prime suspect in the 1963 Santa Barbara Domigos – Edwards murders, "Sandy", was 18 – 25. Meaning (or not) that if Zodiac was responsible for the 1963 murders, he was likely somewhere around 24 to 31 at the time of the Stine murder. On the wanted poster "Sandy" was listed at 150 pounds.

Aside from the young bearded student suspect in the Bates case, there is some other reasons to suppose the age of the Bates killer was younger rather than older. In and around the college library, a man in his thirties or forties would likely have stood out as noticeably older than most of the other people around him, , and thus different and memorable. A young man between the ages of say 18 to 27 would have blended in much better with the college crowd. If true that would put Z’s likely age in 1969 at 21 to 30.

The thing I find least convincing about Ted K as Zodiac is that – if the fiction writing sample that AK Wilks posted somewhere around here is anything to go by – Ted K was a lousy, left-brained fiction writer, and I can’t imagine his poetry being any better.

You rate Zodiac a high quality poet and writer?

You left out Kathleen Johns, who said 160 lbs, from your chart.

Kathleen Johns is not a confirmed Zodiac witness by law enforcement so I left her out.

You leave out when Mageau said 160 lbs,

In that same quote from Mike where he claims he was 160lbs, he also states he was short and stocky. Here is the full quote from the August 19, 2969 Vallejo Times Article:

"He was of stocky build and short, about 5 feet 8 or 9 inches, weighing about 160 pounds"

It’s important to note that Mike himself was extremely skinny so 160 pounds could be heavy for him.

and for some of the other witnesses you choose recorded answers that were heavier than other answers that they gave that were lighter.

All of the descriptions were taken directly from police reports or primary sources. If you can point to any descriptions that I have failed to include, please let me know and I will add them.

I like TK on many levels…only poi where they found an actual hood in his possession….but dam, they all look good at various times as well…if CJB is not a z homicide it really gives some validity in my mind to any of them possibly being z….x and ala only 2 that one could argue being z if cjb is included in the discussion….just my take on the matter..

I think the opposite, for me if Z killed CJB, he can’t be Allen.

I think the opposite, for me if Z killed CJB, he can’t be Allen.

What about TK? He was attending the university of Michigan at the time, and although he may have been taking trips to cal Berkeley, riverside is 6 hours away. Would he really be able to take a 6 hour detour and plan a murder during a visit?

I don’t think Z killed Bates, so in the TK=Z theory, how TK could have murdered Bates shouldn’t be considered at all anyway. For me it’s clear Z seized the occasion of increasing his death count when he was mentioned in the Bates case, and as cocky as he was, it was gold for him.