I’m glad to know there were more. Thank you. Still perturbs me on that en mission. Really like that typography

I’m glad to know there were more. Thank you. Still perturbs me on that en mission. Really like that typography

Do you think it’s an error or deliberate?

I’m glad to know there were more. Thank you. Still perturbs me on that en mission. Really like that typography

Do you think it’s an error or deliberate?

I think it’s deliberate

The San Francisco Chronicle offices were accessible from 5th into Mission. EN is a prefix signifying in or into, used in many English words, chiefly those borrowed from the French. Some English words are written indifferently with en-or in-
@37.7825182,-122.4068059,3a,60y,123.75h,105.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbRhsbOdwVdYXFmM3EakC7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192″> https://www.google.com/maps/ @37.7825182 … 384!8i8192

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56842712

New technology is emerging all the time. Imagine if this "person specific (sic)" analysis were conducted Zodiac writings.

I think you’re on to something. "Street" appears to have been written differently than the rest of the Eureka envelope. It also looks similar to the same word in the Riverside communication. What could this tell us about the authenticity of either? About the identity of the author? About any characteristic he/she possesses that would eliminate suspects?

Reference this picture of the keys;
https://zodiackillerfacts.com/gallery/d … fullsize=1
I previously noted that the white blob with a black blob inside it is
probably a representation of the USPS pony express type logo;
viewtopic.php?f=73&t=57&start=80#p77355

Furthermore, downloading and zooming this part of the picture,

whilst looking at the marking to the side of the white blob, that
marking appears to me to be a cartoon character-like representation
of either a walking man or an upright walking dog. (It does not
appear to me to look like ‘Mr. Zip’.)

I see what appears to be a front and back foot, with the left and
right arms upraised, with the head possibly wearing a cowboy type
hat that has the underside of the wide brim of the hat being visible.
Here is a tracing I attempted to make of the cartoon-like figure;

(As an aide to viewing the head, I have inserted a red dot where I
assume the ‘eye’ would be considered to be – although the actual
Eureka Key picture, of course, has no such red dot.)

(The cartoon-like figure may be holding onto and towing a wheeled
chair, or more likely, a representation of a postman’s wheeled
mail carrier bag, as used by walking postal delivery personnel to
deliver letters in residential areas – but the picture area next
to the cartoon-like figure is so unclear that I acknowledge I could
be wrong and what is actually there could just as likely be several
numbers or alphabet letters.)

In regards to the photo.

Why not printing? Like a speedy print shop. Just thinking of the developer comment in the letter.

In regards to the photo.

Cragle I want to make sure that I understand your post. Are you pointing out that the image is NOT taken with a camera, “developed” and sent to the editor. Instead it is photocopied on a xerox machine making it impossible to connect with any photo developers? Basically, showing him being true to his word about developing photos? If so, that’s deep. And if the letter is real, it works. So was that it? Or did I go on a tangent!

In regards to the photo.

Cragle I want to make sure that I understand your post. Are you pointing out that the image is NOT taken with a camera, “developed” and sent to the editor. Instead it is photocopied on a xerox machine making it impossible to connect with any photo developers? Basically, showing him being true to his word about developing photos? If so, that’s deep. And if the letter is real, it works. So was that it? Or did I go on a tangent!

IF genuine perhaps he was being true to his word , I just thought that it was worth noting due to the link.

In regards to the photo.

Cragle I want to make sure that I understand your post. Are you pointing out that the image is NOT taken with a camera, “developed” and sent to the editor. Instead it is photocopied on a xerox machine making it impossible to connect with any photo developers? Basically, showing him being true to his word about developing photos? If so, that’s deep. And if the letter is real, it works. So was that it? Or did I go on a tangent!

IF genuine perhaps he was being true to his word , I just thought that it was worth noting due to the link.

It’s great. Insightful. If real, it might suggest that he’s still thinking like a criminal 20 years later?

Have you ever asked the questions [1] Why didn’t he photograph the keys with an instamatic or disposable camera, [2] Why didn’t he draw the keys with the numbers on.

[A] He deliberately chose a card teasing us with a name.
He was going to keep us guessing.
[C] He supplied us with only photocopied keys, of supposedly CCK.
[D] Make the connection between the reason he photocopied the keys, in combination with the trace of the numbers – and bingo – both lead to the same name.