There are exactly EIGHTEEN letters written on that car door. So how is it that entire letters cannot be confirmed or repudiated, but 18 letters written on a car door are conclusive?

You make a great point. I have no answer for this. You are correct that you would need a much larger sample of the LB Killer’s writing to make a handwriting match to the letters. So, the writing on the car door is not very good evidence. Now, the content of the writing is another matter. There was no internet in 1969 to look up prior Zodiac murder dates. So, if the LB Killer is a copycat, he had to commit the murder dates to memory from newspaper articles. It’s certainly possible. It just means that a copycat when through a great deal of effort to mimic Zodiac, only to never do so again. Seems like a lot of work for one copycat crime. But it is not impossible.

Not a lot of work considering he sewed that ridiculous costume. Shooter Z referred to LHR as happening at Christmass, not the actual date, Dec. 20. So, yes, the LB Stabber was a bit of a student of his idol.

An evolutionary process involves incremental improvements, with each subsequent step building on the previous advancements. This is how I see
Zodiac’s evolution:

LHR
Successful in the sense both victims were killed and Z avoided capture, but there was one mistake that could’ve been real trouble: Betty Lou
was able to run some distance away. Several things could have potentially gone wrong, like Betty running into the road and being picked up by
the headlights of a far away oncoming car, whose occupants would’ve been alerted to an in-progress assault, or Z’s gun jamming or him missing
a few times and needing to reload, allowing Betty to escape, etc.

So, two corrective measures were needed.
1. Shoot victims while they are still in their car. It is easier and much safer to shoot fish in a barrel rather than trying to shoot them
as they are swimming out to sea.
2. Use a higher caliber gun. If a young girl requires 5 .22 shots to knock her down, more firepower is required.

We don’t really need to debate whether Z’s thought process was somewhat along these lines because, as my mom used to say, "Actions speak
louder than words." The next attack was quite similar to LHR with 2 notable exceptions – those above 2 enhancements.

BRS
Only partially successful. Enough to launch the letter writing phase, and capture was avoided, but leaving a survivir was a failure. The
stated goal (whether Z actually believed this or was just using it for his persona) was to collect slaves in the afterlife by killing them.
So, going one for two at BRS was a partial failure.

More corrective measures were needed:
3. Pumping a bunch of bullets, even the 9mm shells he was now using, didn’t guarantee a kill. A head shot with a 9mm would.
4. Shooting a victim who was squirming around, like Mike Mageau had done, makes hitting a smaller target in the night difficult. To ensure a

fatal head shot, point-blank range would be required.

PH
A complete success. Victim killed spectacularly and gruesomely, with bloody shirt piece removed, evidence wiped clean, and despite multiple
witnesses and even a brief conversation with 2 police officers responding to the scene, a clean escape. Much of that was luck, of course, but
look at the killing method elements:

1. Victim shot while in his car, with no chance to escape.
2. Higher caliber (9mm) gun used again.
3. Head shot that left no chance of survival because
4. It was delivered from point-blank range.

This is a logical evolutionary progression. Now, for those who think the same guy killed at Lake Berryessa, try to fit that crime into the
above progression. It is a total anomaly, like a cold, hardened mafia hit man, refining his efficiency, suddenly reverting to childlike
fantasies of a comic book super villain. It makes no sense to think these are the same guys.
The lesson learned from BRS is that multiple serious wounds do not guarantee a kill. This is why the next shooting left no chance for
survival. Had LB been the same guy who partially failed at BRS, throats would’ve been cut.

No I am basing this on.

1. Writing on a car door
2. Vaguely similar descriptions, despite the fact Stabber Z was concealed behind a mask
3. The use of the cross hair symbol on the costume and the car, had this part of any of the previous letters every been shown in the papers ? (Apart from the ciphers)
4. The number 8 written on the car door and how it was formed. Did Z previously write the number 8 before LB ?
5. The pulling up of his car to almost touching the other cars.
6. The phone call which Slaight took
7. The fact that Slaight said Sam sounded younger than Zodiac
8. The location of the phone call
9. The parody of “The most Dangerous game”
10. The fact that he was linked to Snoozy and Furlong before this attack in which one the headlines in papers read “By Knife”, yes though I know he did not write Aug.
11. The shoe imprints
12. The fact that no LE seemed to show doubt it was Z, or the DOJ or the FBI.
13. No evidence has every arisen that proves it was not Zodiac and nobody has taken credit.
14. The fact that he claimed responsibility for the attack

I agree that there is a possibility that it was not Zodiac but occam’s razor works for me in this instance.

Your turn.

Not a lot of work considering he sewed that ridiculous costume. Shooter Z referred to LHR as happening at Christmass, not the actual date, Dec. 20. So, yes, the LB Stabber was a bit of a student of his idol.

But he also had the prescience to mail the Belli Letter on the date of the LHR anniversary. So, he knew the actual date. Dec. 20 is close to Christmas, and Christmas can be referred to as a season, not just a date. However, your point about the evolution between LHR, BRS, and PH murders is well taken.

An evolutionary process involves incremental improvements, with each subsequent step building on the previous advancements. This is how I see
Zodiac’s evolution:

LHR
Successful in the sense both victims were killed and Z avoided capture, but there was one mistake that could’ve been real trouble: Betty Lou
was able to run some distance away. Several things could have potentially gone wrong, like Betty running into the road and being picked up by
the headlights of a far away oncoming car, whose occupants would’ve been alerted to an in-progress assault, or Z’s gun jamming or him missing
a few times and needing to reload, allowing Betty to escape, etc.

So, two corrective measures were needed.
1. Shoot victims while they are still in their car. It is easier and much safer to shoot fish in a barrel rather than trying to shoot them
as they are swimming out to sea.
2. Use a higher caliber gun. If a young girl requires 5 .22 shots to knock her down, more firepower is required.

We don’t really need to debate whether Z’s thought process was somewhat along these lines because, as my mom used to say, "Actions speak
louder than words." The next attack was quite similar to LHR with 2 notable exceptions – those above 2 enhancements.

BRS
Only partially successful. Enough to launch the letter writing phase, and capture was avoided, but leaving a survivir was a failure. The
stated goal (whether Z actually believed this or was just using it for his persona) was to collect slaves in the afterlife by killing them.
So, going one for two at BRS was a partial failure.

More corrective measures were needed:
3. Pumping a bunch of bullets, even the 9mm shells he was now using, didn’t guarantee a kill. A head shot with a 9mm would.
4. Shooting a victim who was squirming around, like Mike Mageau had done, makes hitting a smaller target in the night difficult. To ensure a

fatal head shot, point-blank range would be required.

PH
A complete success. Victim killed spectacularly and gruesomely, with bloody shirt piece removed, evidence wiped clean, and despite multiple
witnesses and even a brief conversation with 2 police officers responding to the scene, a clean escape. Much of that was luck, of course, but
look at the killing method elements:

1. Victim shot while in his car, with no chance to escape.
2. Higher caliber (9mm) gun used again.
3. Head shot that left no chance of survival because
4. It was delivered from point-blank range.

This is a logical evolutionary progression. Now, for those who think the same guy killed at Lake Berryessa, try to fit that crime into the
above progression. It is a total anomaly, like a cold, hardened mafia hit man, refining his efficiency, suddenly reverting to childlike
fantasies of a comic book super villain. It makes no sense to think these are the same guys.
The lesson learned from BRS is that multiple serious wounds do not guarantee a kill. This is why the next shooting left no chance for
survival. Had LB been the same guy who partially failed at BRS, throats would’ve been cut.

As previously mentioned :-

1st attack was successful although BLJ managed to get a small distance away before being shot,
He learned he had to keep the victims contained

2nd attack was a failure. Whilst similar, he chose to not allow them out of the car and kept the victims confined, was not as clinical as he left a survivor.
He learned that a gun is not always successful, and that up close was better.

3rd attack was a failure. In an isolated area where it would have been very difficult for them to escape due to being surrounded by water on three side and the attacker blocking the 4th. He had a gun to use if needs be and proved it was loaded to deter them from any thought of flight. By tying the victims up he ensure that they categorically could not escape. Yes he could have used a gun but as it was daylight and there were people in the area so a knife was used. BH played dead and as he stabbed CS more times than BH he would have assumed she was dead also.
He learned a knife was not successful.

4th attack was a success. Victim was contained and Z was fully in control of the situation. Victims killed in virtually exactly the same fashion as DF.
This is an acclimation of what he had previously learned. Gun was his most effective method, he needed to contain the victim and a shot to the head from very close range proved to be the most efficient way of attack.

Again apologies from talking blarse about the victims. I truly do not intended come across as insensitive. Talking matter of factly unfortunately sometimes helps though.

Let’s not forget the Snoozy Furlong connections in the press prior to the Lake Berryessa attack, the use of ByKnife in an article about Zodiac and Z subsequent hinting towards his involvement

3rd attack was a failure. In an isolated area where it would have been very difficult for them to escape due to being surrounded by water on three side and the attacker blocking the 4th. He had a gun to use if needs be and proved it was loaded to deter them from any thought of flight. By tying the victims up he ensure that they categorically could not escape. Yes he could have used a gun but as it was daylight and there were people in the area so a knife was used. BH played dead and as he stabbed CS more times than BH he would have assumed she was dead also.
He learned a knife was not successful.

Lake Berryessa was a failure because it didn’t incorporate what Shooter Z had learned and already corrected for:

By putting on the costume before approaching his victims, it gave them time to run. Shooter Z learned not to do this at LHR. Containment was the biggest lesson learned there.

Assuming victims were dead or dying was the mistake he made at BRS. You are saying he made the identical mistake again, very next time out?

What you are saying is that Z didn’t learn anything from his previous mistakes. Throw out LB as the outlier it obviously is, and his learning evolution is perfectly consistent and logical.

Lake Berryessa was a failure because it didn’t incorporate what Shooter Z had learned and already corrected for:

By putting on the costume before approaching his victims, it gave them time to run. Shooter Z learned not to do this at LHR. Containment was the biggest lesson learned there.

In LHR, the turnout was right off the road. In LB, the island was a much longer distance from the road. If Bryan and Cecilia tried to run to the road, they would have had to run towards Z, right? So, I don’t understand this observation. He had them cornered.

Not a lot of work considering he sewed that ridiculous costume. Shooter Z referred to LHR as happening at Christmass, not the actual date, Dec. 20. So, yes, the LB Stabber was a bit of a student of his idol.

But he also had the prescience to mail the Belli Letter on the date of the LHR anniversary. So, he knew the actual date. Dec. 20 is close to Christmas, and Christmas can be referred to as a season, not just a date. However, your point about the evolution between LHR, BRS, and PH murders is well taken.

The date of LHR was well known and hardly exclusive to the Zodiac. The fact he used Christmass in a letter is an indication we wasn’t too concerned about being technically specific.

As opposed to the super-specific guy at LB, who specified the LHR date, and specified his own fantasy attack down to the minute.

Lake Berryessa was a failure because it didn’t incorporate what Shooter Z had learned and already corrected for:

By putting on the costume before approaching his victims, it gave them time to run. Shooter Z learned not to do this at LHR. Containment was the biggest lesson learned there.

In LHR, the turnout was right off the road. In LB, the island was a much longer distance from the road. If Bryan and Cecilia tried to run to the road, they would have had to run towards Z, right? So, I don’t understand this observation. He had them cornered.

Why would they run towards him? If each runs to the opposite side of the island, what does Stabber Z do? Go after one, creating an escape route for the other? What if they were good swimmers, ran to different ends of the island, and independently swam for shore?

Shooter Z, after LHR, didn’t allow any chance for escape. None.

Why would they run towards him? If each runs to the opposite side of the island, what does Stabber Z do? Go after one, creating an escape route for the other? What if they were good swimmers, ran to different ends of the island, and independently swam for shore?

Shooter Z, after LHR, didn’t allow any chance for escape. None.

Interesting thought experiment. Assuming that Cecilia and Bryan had the prescience to run in different directions, my guess is that Z goes after Cecilia and holds her at gunpoint to coax Bryan to return and comply. That is what I would do. If they ran in different directions, I think that Z would have guessed that they came in the same car and that one would not leave the area without the other. He only needs one of them to flush out the other. If Hartnell actually just left Cecilia, Z probably just kills her. But, I am speculating.

If they opted to swim for it, who knows?

3rd attack was a failure. In an isolated area where it would have been very difficult for them to escape due to being surrounded by water on three side and the attacker blocking the 4th. He had a gun to use if needs be and proved it was loaded to deter them from any thought of flight. By tying the victims up he ensure that they categorically could not escape. Yes he could have used a gun but as it was daylight and there were people in the area so a knife was used. BH played dead and as he stabbed CS more times than BH he would have assumed she was dead also.
He learned a knife was not successful.

Lake Berryessa was a failure because it didn’t incorporate what Shooter Z had learned and already corrected for:

By putting on the costume before approaching his victims, it gave them time to run. Shooter Z learned not to do this at LHR. Containment was the biggest lesson learned there.

Assuming victims were dead or dying was the mistake he made at BRS. You are saying he made the identical mistake again, very next time out?

What you are saying is that Z didn’t learn anything from his previous mistakes. Throw out LB as the outlier it obviously is, and his learning evolution is perfectly consistent and logical.

There would be no need to run before he put the costume on, he got close enough before doing this that when it was in place they already had no where to run. Worst case scenario they ran before he donned the hood, there would be nothing against him.

Like I said he already though that Brian Hartnell was dead, Brian even said himself that he played dead. We don’t know what state Cecelia was in but it would have been logical to assume that she would also die due to the higher number of wounds she received.

Yes by tying them up and being able to focus his attacks, along with the fact he would have thought Brian was already dead, the fading light and the apparent remoteness of the site the attacker probably assumed that even if Cecelia hadn’t died immediately she would have done so sooner rather than later. The dark would have hid her from view. Hence the reason he went back to a close up gun shot at PH. The costume obviously had multiple significance, one of which was to provide some level of covering for his under garments from blood.

There would be no need to run before he put the costume on, he got close enough before doing this that when it was in place they already had no where to run. Worst case scenario they ran before he donned the hood, there would be nothing against him.

Stabber Z had to put on the hood before he was close enough to be seen and later described. As soon as he does, there is a possibility Bryan and Cecelia will begin to take evasive action.

Like I said he already though that Brian Hartnell was dead, Brian even said himself that he played dead. We don’t know what state Cecelia was in but it would have been logical to assume that she would also die due to the higher number of wounds she received.

Yes by tying them up and being able to focus his attacks, along with the fact he would have thought Brian was already dead, the fading light and the apparent remoteness of the site the attacker probably assumed that even if Cecelia hadn’t died immediately she would have done so sooner rather than later. The dark would have hid her from view. Hence the reason he went back to a close up gun shot at PH. The costume obviously had multiple significance, one of which was to provide some level of covering for his under garments from blood.

Yes, exactly my point! Shooter Z thought Mike Mageau was dead too but he was wrong, resulting in failure. So you are saying he made the exact same mistake the very next attack, by assuming his victims were dead. That is not Z "evolving." Shooter Z made no such mistake HIS next time out at PH. He killed Paul Stine quite definitely, with an exclamation point.

3rd attack was a failure. In an isolated area where it would have been very difficult for them to escape due to being surrounded by water on three side and the attacker blocking the 4th. He had a gun to use if needs be and proved it was loaded to deter them from any thought of flight. By tying the victims up he ensure that they categorically could not escape. Yes he could have used a gun but as it was daylight and there were people in the area so a knife was used. BH played dead and as he stabbed CS more times than BH he would have assumed she was dead also.
He learned a knife was not successful.

Lake Berryessa was a failure because it didn’t incorporate what Shooter Z had learned and already corrected for:

By putting on the costume before approaching his victims, it gave them time to run. Shooter Z learned not to do this at LHR. Containment was the biggest lesson learned there.

Assuming victims were dead or dying was the mistake he made at BRS. You are saying he made the identical mistake again, very next time out?

What you are saying is that Z didn’t learn anything from his previous mistakes. Throw out LB as the outlier it obviously is, and his learning evolution is perfectly consistent and logical.

It seems extremely pedantic to assume that a deranged serial killer would prioritize carrying out murders "logically" or efficiently in every single instance. The Paul Stine murder was in some ways more brazen and risky than Lake Berryessa, considering it was in a major city and not isolated public park, as evidenced by the fact that Zodiac could have been caught at the crime scene.

Stabber Z had to put on the hood before he was close enough to be seen and later described. As soon as he does, there is a possibility Bryan and Cecelia will begin to take evasive action.

Where exactly would they go ?. They were surrounded on three sides with water, the attack blocked the 4th ?? Unless they decided to jump into the water (look how big Berryessa is). Also he had his gun so if they did try to escape they would have to go closer to the attacker to get away, easier for him to shoot.

Yes, exactly my point! Shooter Z thought Mike Mageau was dead too but he was wrong, resulting in failure. So you are saying he made the exact same mistake the very next attack, by assuming his victims were dead. That is not Z "evolving." Shooter Z made no such mistake HIS next time out at PH. He killed Paul Stine quite definitely, with an exclamation point.

He did not KNOW OR THINK MM was dead, hell he even went back to try to finish the job when MM screamed out. I think you are negating your own point, Just because he went back to his original most effective method at PH does not mean that he didn’t deviate in between. Look at where MM was shot, perhaps after he survived the attacker no longer had faith in the head shot method that he had used with DF. Just because he used a knife does not mean that it wasn’t Zodiac. A large number of serial killers a later deviate between method’s, Kemper if the prime example.

Like you previously said “Let’s not pick and choose bits and pieces.” You said you had a dozen reasons to believe it was not Zodiac, perhaps these could add weight to you arguments?

Why would they run towards him? If each runs to the opposite side of the island, what does Stabber Z do? Go after one, creating an escape route for the other? What if they were good swimmers, ran to different ends of the island, and independently swam for shore?

Shooter Z, after LHR, didn’t allow any chance for escape. None.

Interesting thought experiment. Assuming that Cecilia and Bryan had the prescience to run in different directions, my guess is that Z goes after Cecilia and holds her at gunpoint to coax Bryan to return and comply. That is what I would do. If they ran in different directions, I think that Z would have guessed that they came in the same car and that one would not leave the area without the other. He only needs one of them to flush out the other. If Hartnell actually just left Cecilia, Z probably just kills her. But, I am speculating.

If they opted to swim for it, who knows?

What does Z do with his hood as he’s chasing Cecelia? As you’ve noted, the hood already limited his vision. Running with it would’ve bounced it around and had it twisted a couple inches, would’ve completely blinded him. Does he discard it, with the sweat, hairs, skin cells likely inside it (this from a guy who apparently was careful enough to not leave skin cells on postage stamps?) Or does he chase Cecelia after taking off the hood, tucking it under one arm as he holds the gun with the other, with the sheathed knife at his side and the rope wrapped around his waist? Either way, his disguise is now compromised as both Bryan and Cecelia can see his face.

Suppose one of them does try to swim away and the gun has to be used. Gunshots over water can be heard from miles away. Does Stabber Z shoot Bryan and Cecelia, alerting everyone in the entire area, including everyone between him and his vehicle, then walk back to his car with the executioner hood on (to avoid witness descriptions) or does he walk out with the hood under his arm? I assume he also removes the bib which advertises him as a serial killer.

At BRS, Mike described Shooter Z as being very calm, walking to the car, emptying his gun, walking back to his car to reload, walking back and shooting some more. At PH, Lindsey described Shooter Z taking his time, wiping down the cab, then walking calmly away.

So in this LB scenario, where the gun has to be used, if it’s the same assailant, does he walk calmly back to his car, past anyone in the area, as if he hadn’t heard the shots, or wasn’t curious or concerned about them? A guy walking calmly from a scene where shots had just been fired would be highly suspect, and with his hood off, surely he would’ve been seen, later possibly identified, maybe followed to his vehicle, maybe even confronted and apprehended with the Zodiac symbol on him and 2 shot victims behind him, etc. If he ran, he would by necessity have to have removed his hood, and running simply wasn’t Shooter Z’s style.

Look, this is all hypothetical speculation and the only purpose for it is to show that a careful planner avoids the possibility of the situation flying out of control like this. Many things could’ve gone haywire at LB. Shooter Z, however, planned his killings in such a way as to give his victims no power to escape.

My argument isn’t with a hypothetical scenario – it is with the ridiculously flawed and vulnerable plan utilized at LB. It is a dramatic deviation from the evolutionary planning of Shooter Z.