Amongst some, a LB Zodiac copycat theory is consistently called "outlandish" in the same way liberals consistently call the claims of readily apparent instances of voter fraud 6 months ago "baseless"…"
Oh boy.
The word isn’t copycat, it is:
ap·pro·pri·ateverb
1. take (something) for one’s own use, typically without the owner’s permission: "his images have been appropriated by advertisers"
Let’s not detract from the discussion at hand but seems quite apt:-
copycat
1, a person who copies another’s behaviour, dress, or ideas. "all writers are copycats"
2. denoting an action, typically a crime, carried out in imitation of another. "copycat killings"
His killing tools are described on the Bus Bomb letter. I included an image. He uses the inclusive term "killing tools" but only talks about guns, which apparently couldn’t be purchased through the mail after a certain date. Again, the attack on Bryan and Cecelia, the halloween costume, and the car door writing all tie together, obviously. But I don’t think they tie back to Shooter Z.
“ We debate the authenticity of entire mailings, but consider the 18 letters on the car door as conclusive. Now you’re taking that and saying you can draw a conclusion from just one number? Wow. Well, does the LB car door "8" really look that similar to the Bus Bomb "8"? Big bottom loop, tiny bottom loop.”
They aren’t though, he does not describe anything. The part of the letter you are referring to is ambiguous at best. Killing “tools” (note not weapons, guns, ammo) could have been interpreted as anything from the rope used to the clothes he wore. The very fact that he refers to them in relation specifically to “the ban” means that he is only talking about items that this affected. Thus meaning the the knife is a moot point in relation to the Bus bomb letter in my eyes.
I fully appreciate that they are not exact, but we are talking about a vast difference in scale, angle and situation. Just look at the change in Zodiacs writing throughout the confirmed letters, even the first three which were all at the same time show some noticeable differences. I would think though that it is uncommon (which I’m sure you will disagree with) not complete the top part of the 8’s construction and yet here we have apparently two different people doing this.
Honestly, when I look at the Z letters and samples of TK’s writing, I would swear it’s the same guy. Then I look at Fred Manalli’s handwriting samples and I’m left wondering….. were Zodiac, Ted Kaczynski and Fred Manalli all the same guy? Yes, I’m kidding, but it really makes me skeptical of handwriting analysis done on very small samples.
This is why we should leave the analysis to people who have worked with original documents :-
“Photocopies typically do not reveal all the evidence found on the original document or document being copied, i.e., significant quality and features of the writing, indentations, outlines, feather strokes, pen stops, alterations, etc. A photocopy can also contain artifacts not on the original. These artifacts may be dirt, dried white-out, or scratches on the glass. There may also be defects on the machine’s drum, or some other cause.”
————————————-
I’m glad you say this because I enjoy the debate and don’t want to annoy people. I’ve got no dog in the fight. I have no pet suspect, I’m not writing a book or working on a podcast, and I’ve never been shy about admitting a mistake, or being convinced towards a new viewpoint. For a long time I thought LB was obviously Zodiac too. Everyone said so. But then, a few people here who I think are particularly clear headed (like Tahoe) started making points that I found compelling, and the more I thought about it, the more distinction I saw between the shootings and the stabbings. Not just the weapons, that’s just a tiny difference.
Debate then, put forward your view. Previously you stated “I wish you would elaborate. Besides Stabber Z claiming to be the real Zodiac, why do you think he was? I can give you a dozen reasons why he likely was not.” I have fulfilled my end of the bargain, please can you fulfil yours ?
Marshall, how does your LB Copycat theory square with the Halloween Card? "By Knife" and "By Rope" make no sense without the LB attack.
Marshall, how does your LB Copycat theory square with the Halloween Card? "By Knife" and "By Rope" make no sense without the LB attack.
No reason to think the Halloween card is a hoax either. Particularly as the crossed "sorry no cipher" message on the postcard corresponds with the transposition pattern of the then-unsolved 340 cipher.
If you are talking about the Debut letter, August 4th.
If it was made public before Lake Berryessa, and someone wanted to appropriate his identity to commit that crime, it is perfectly in keeping that they would see it as an extension, or an addition, to Z having his "good times in Vallejo."
Zodiac is clearly rebutting the notion that LE could zero in on him through weapon tracing, the description, prints…guns leave a trail of red tape unless you acquire them "under the counter." So there was zero reason for him to be discussing knives (or water pistols, or Cream of Wheat) in this context. (That you mention a "knife ban" is kind of funny, are you from the USA?)
Let’s scrutinize Zodiac’s wording in other cases: Zodiac didn’t say he shot Faraday with a point blank shot to the head, he said he sprayed them with bullets. He also didn’t give the name of the park where he shot Ferrin and Mageau, said he drove away slowly when Mageau reported squealing tires, and it’s highly debatable whether Washington and Cherry is "by" Washington and Maple.
Well, with Faraday and Jensen, he did fire off, was it 9 or 10, rounds in total? That could be described as "spraying." He was using a pistol, not a Gatling gun.
Slowly and squealing tires is a pretty minor thing, and he may have turned a corner fast but then slowed down soon after so as not to draw attention to himself.
Washington and Maple was the intended destination, so that’s what he said.
Those are all pretty thin "inconsistencies." Yes, December 20 isn’t Christmass either. But "killing tools" is an odd phrase, and all-inclusive term, and distinctly different from "guns." He didn’t mention a knife because he didn’t use a knife. He probably didn’t even have a knife of any kind on him during the attack right after LB – because cutting Paul’s shirt would’ve been a lot easier than ripping it.
Marshall, how does your LB Copycat theory square with the Halloween Card? "By Knife" and "By Rope" make no sense without the LB attack.
No reason to think the Halloween card is a hoax either. Particularly as the crossed "sorry no cipher" message on the postcard corresponds with the transposition pattern of the then-unsolved 340 cipher.
"By Knife" written on the car door was public information long before the halloween card. I don’t think that card is conclusively Shooter Z, could be, maybe not. I see Shooter Z as being more sloppy in his correspondence, like his bus bomb drawing. The Halloween card looks more like what a guy who made the costume would do – more of an artsy type. But regardless, the fact "sorry no cipher" was crossed means nothing. You are really picking and choosing here. You’re saying crossed words represent a period 19 solution (do we see 19 eyes in the tree, or any such indication?) but ignore the fact the 340 was, in fact, a cipher.
Marshall, how does your LB Copycat theory square with the Halloween Card? "By Knife" and "By Rope" make no sense without the LB attack.
No reason to think the Halloween card is a hoax either. Particularly as the crossed "sorry no cipher" message on the postcard corresponds with the transposition pattern of the then-unsolved 340 cipher.
"By Knife" written on the car door was public information long before the halloween card. I don’t think that card is conclusively Shooter Z, could be, maybe not. I see Shooter Z as being more sloppy in his correspondence, like his bus bomb drawing. The Halloween card looks more like what a guy who made the costume would do – more of an artsy type. But regardless, the fact "sorry no cipher" was crossed means nothing. You are really picking and choosing here. You’re saying crossed words represent a period 19 solution (do we see 19 eyes in the tree, or any such indication?) but ignore the fact the 340 was, in fact, a cipher.
I’m not following? I referred to the 340 as a transposition cipher. And why would someone capable of putting ciphers together not be capable of constructing something like the Halloween card? There were some encryption errors but one could hardly describe them as "sloppy".
Debate then, put forward your view. Previously you stated “I wish you would elaborate. Besides Stabber Z claiming to be the real Zodiac, why do you think he was? I can give you a dozen reasons why he likely was not.” I have fulfilled my end of the bargain, please can you fulfil yours ?
Actually, I’ve had this identical debate, sometimes vigorously, with Richard and others, a couple times before. I don’t want to be overly redundant and go through the same things again but maybe tonight I can link those threads into this one if you want to see what was previously discussed.
I’m not following? I referred to the 340 as a transposition cipher. And why would someone capable of putting ciphers together not be capable of constructing something like the Halloween card? There were some encryption errors but one could hardly describe them as "sloppy".
When I said "sloppy" I meant not a guy you’d think of as a seamstress or graphic artist, as the costume and halloween card would suggest.
Shooter Z was technical in some ways, like the coded messages, the bomb designs, use of the word "radians", and so on.
Yes, YOU referred to the 340 as a transposition cipher. But you used the words on the card "sorry no cipher" as evidence the guy was referencing the 340, because of the way "sorry no cipher" was written. Okay, they were crossed. But read the words – he’s saying "no cipher." It WAS a cipher. See the inconsistency?
Well, with Faraday and Jensen, he did fire off, was it 9 or 10, rounds in total? That could be described as "spraying." He was using a pistol, not a Gatling gun.
Slowly and squealing tires is a pretty minor thing, and he may have turned a corner fast but then slowed down soon after so as not to draw attention to himself.
Washington and Maple was the intended destination, so that’s what he said.Those are all pretty thin "inconsistencies." Yes, December 20 isn’t Christmass either. But "killing tools" is an odd phrase, and all-inclusive term, and distinctly different from "guns." He didn’t mention a knife because he didn’t use a knife. He probably didn’t even have a knife of any kind on him during the attack right after LB – because cutting Paul’s shirt would’ve been a lot easier than ripping it.
Whoa, Nelly! Backup. You can’t pick and choose, you say that what he wrote was a “minor thing” but then in the next paragraph seem to take Zodiacs word as canon. Either he left with “Squealing tyres” like a witness said or he didn’t as he he wrote. Which is it ? Either you believe what Zodiac wrote was ALL correct or that you accept that perhaps he was not being truthful?
IF as you put “ he may have turned a corner fast but then slowed down soon after so as not to draw attention to himself” when he wrote he left the scene NOT with squealing tyres, then you must have the opinion that he was not totally truthful. This in turn completely negates the “ He didn’t mention a knife because he didn’t use a knife.” argument.
Marshall, how does your LB Copycat theory square with the Halloween Card? "By Knife" and "By Rope" make no sense without the LB attack.
No reason to think the Halloween card is a hoax either. Particularly as the crossed "sorry no cipher" message on the postcard corresponds with the transposition pattern of the then-unsolved 340 cipher.
"By Knife" written on the car door was public information long before the halloween card. I don’t think that card is conclusively Shooter Z, could be, maybe not. I see Shooter Z as being more sloppy in his correspondence, like his bus bomb drawing. The Halloween card looks more like what a guy who made the costume would do – more of an artsy type. But regardless, the fact "sorry no cipher" was crossed means nothing. You are really picking and choosing here. You’re saying crossed words represent a period 19 solution (do we see 19 eyes in the tree, or any such indication?) but ignore the fact the 340 was, in fact, a cipher.
I think perhaps you may have misunderstood Jacob, he was alluding to the fact it was written diagonally as in keeping with the solution of the 340.
Shooter Z was technical in some ways, like the coded messages, the bomb designs, use of the word "radians", and so on.
When I said "sloppy" I meant not a guy you’d think of as a seamstress or graphic artist, as the costume and halloween card would suggest.
Seriously? How can you not recognize the artistic creativity of the ciphers?
If I knew nothing about the Zodiac case I’d assume they were some sort of modern art piece. And now you’re conveniently assuming the Halloween card was by the Lake Berryessa "impostor" just because it supports your theory.
When I said "sloppy" I meant not a guy you’d think of as a seamstress or graphic artist, as the costume and halloween card would suggest.
Seriously? How can you not recognize the artistic creativity of the ciphers?
If I knew nothing about the Zodiac case I’d assume they were some sort of modern art piece. And now you’re conveniently assuming the Halloween card was by the Lake Berryessa "impostor" just because it supports your theory.
For the love of God, there are SOOOO many aberrant personalities in this thread…somebody should write a book.
Tell me, do you wear YOUR Zodiac costume while you post?
Whoa, Nelly! Backup. You can’t pick and choose, you say that what he wrote was a “minor thing” but then in the next paragraph seem to take Zodiacs word as canon. Either he left with “Squealing tyres” like a witness said or he didn’t as he he wrote. Which is it ? Either you believe what Zodiac wrote was ALL correct or that you accept that perhaps he was not being truthful?
IF as you put “ he may have turned a corner fast but then slowed down soon after so as not to draw attention to himself” when he wrote he left the scene NOT with squealing tyres, then you must have the opinion that he was not totally truthful. This in turn completely negates the “ He didn’t mention a knife because he didn’t use a knife.” argument.
He can leave with squealing tires and later drive slower. Leaving with squealing tires does not mean he sped for 10 miles.
No, it negates nothing.
