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.

I understood Jacob. He was putting credence in the way the words were written while conveniently overlooking what the words actually say.

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.

I understood Jacob. He was putting credence in the way the words were written while conveniently overlooking what the words actually say.

You mean "sorry, no cipher"? I was suggesting that the haughty Zodiac could have offered a mocking hint at how his unsolved cipher could be decrypted.

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.

No he was reacting directly to the below article, he even states this in the same sentence “described in the Vallejo paper”.

In the context of what we are discussing what he did after he left is irrelevant.

This is the noteworthy part: There is a subtle difference between the two accounts, in that the Vallejo Times-Herald newspaper article refers to peeling rubber, whereas the Debut of Zodiac letter alters this to squealling tires. When we take a look at page 15 of the Blue Rock Springs police report regarding George Bryant, it states that after the gunshots ceased "he then heard a car take off at super speed and it burned rubber and was squealing its tires as it sped along the road".

It can be seen that the "Zodiac Killer" in the August 4th 1969 Debut letter described squealling tires, while the police report on July 7th 1969 described the car as squealing its tires. Is this an unfortunate coincidence of common phraseology, or did the author of the Debut of Zodiac letter inadvertently use the language he had read in the Blue Rock Springs police report?.

This is the noteworthy part: There is a subtle difference between the two accounts, in that the Vallejo Times-Herald newspaper article refers to peeling rubber, whereas the Debut of Zodiac letter alters this to squealling tires. When we take a look at page 15 of the Blue Rock Springs police report regarding George Bryant, it states that after the gunshots ceased "he then heard a car take off at super speed and it burned rubber and was squealing its tires as it sped along the road".

It can be seen that the "Zodiac Killer" in the August 4th 1969 Debut letter described squealling tires, while the police report on July 7th 1969 described the car as squealing its tires. Is this an unfortunate coincidence of common phraseology, or did the author of the Debut of Zodiac letter inadvertently use the language he had read in the Blue Rock Springs police report?.

It has the vibe of common phraseology.

This is the noteworthy part: There is a subtle difference between the two accounts, in that the Vallejo Times-Herald newspaper article refers to peeling rubber, whereas the Debut of Zodiac letter alters this to squealling tires. When we take a look at page 15 of the Blue Rock Springs police report regarding George Bryant, it states that after the gunshots ceased "he then heard a car take off at super speed and it burned rubber and was squealing its tires as it sped along the road".

It can be seen that the "Zodiac Killer" in the August 4th 1969 Debut letter described squealling tires, while the police report on July 7th 1969 described the car as squealing its tires. Is this an unfortunate coincidence of common phraseology, or did the author of the Debut of Zodiac letter inadvertently use the language he had read in the Blue Rock Springs police report?.

I think he read the police reports. He also talks about the position of the bodies at Lake Herman road and, unless he had a photographic memory as his letter was 7 months after the fact, he got that from the reports as well.

I said "in Vallejo" not "near Vallejo". Benicia is near Vallejo.

When the San Francisco Chronicle was referencing Vallejo, and the kids were from Vallejo, and the crime scene was very near Vallejo, and the second Zodiac attack was in Vallejo, I think it’s reasonable that an admirer of Zodiac would refer to Vallejo.

Letting logic get in the way? Pssshhh…what a rube.

“Why are you locked into a copycat concept? If the guy was a copycat he wouldn’t have worn a halloween outfit and used a knife. I am suggesting he was some nut who had his own, distinctly different, fantasy he wanted to play out.”

Seriously a person who wears a customer with a Zodiac symbol on then copies Zodics writing and symbol on a car door is not a copycat, you are the person who is proposing this theory but what you call the above ?

The word isn’t copycat, it is:
ap·pro·pri·ate

verb

1. take (something) for one’s own use, typically without the owner’s permission: "his images have been appropriated by advertiser.

This idea was actually floated on another website more than a decade ago…dueling Zodiacs, if you will.

It incorporated the Judy Lichti murder on 7/4/69 and a couple of the post-1969 murders that some are so anxious to attribute to Zodiac, explained the radical differences in the correspondences, etc…it was actually pretty well thought out, if I remember correctly.

But what struck me most was the response it received from the "experts" and nascent, wannabe "experts" of the day…

It was repeatedly, and on several sites, dismissively referred to as another "Team Z" theory, even though it explicitly stated that it was about one killer trying to steal another killer’s rep and upstage him…no "Team" about it.

The point is, people often allow their prejudices to get in the way of their ability to comprehend what they read…especially when agendas are in play…

Here’s the idea being discussed in general in a post by one of the nascent "experts" of the time…and the idea itself being totally misconstrued.
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threa … ler.84643/

“Why are you locked into a copycat concept? If the guy was a copycat he wouldn’t have worn a halloween outfit and used a knife. I am suggesting he was some nut who had his own, distinctly different, fantasy he wanted to play out.”

Seriously a person who wears a customer with a Zodiac symbol on then copies Zodics writing and symbol on a car door is not a copycat, you are the person who is proposing this theory but what you call the above ?

The word isn’t copycat, it is:
ap·pro·pri·ate

verb

1. take (something) for one’s own use, typically without the owner’s permission: "his images have been appropriated by advertiser.

This idea was actually floated on another website more than a decade ago…dueling Zodiacs, if you will.

It incorporated the Judy Lichti murder on 7/4/69 and a couple of the post-1969 murders that some are so anxious to attribute to Zodiac, explained the radical differences in the correspondences, etc…it was actually pretty well thought out, if I remember correctly.

But what struck me most was the response it received from the "experts" and nascent, wannabe "experts" of the day…

It was repeatedly, and on several sites, dismissively referred to as another "Team Z" theory, even though it explicitly stated that it was about one killer trying to steal another killer’s rep and upstage him…no "Team" about it.

The point is, people often allow their prejudices to get in the way of their ability to comprehend what they read…especially when agendas are in play…

Here’s the idea being discussed in general in a post by one of the nascent "experts" of the time…and the idea itself being totally misconstrued.
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threa … ler.84643/

I have worked in software development for several companies over the years, and some of the smartest people I knew had a habit of getting "locked in" to a concept or methodology, and were not at all comfortable thinking outside the box.

Here’s yet another example. On 11/8/1969, Shooter Z wrote the dripping Pen card. Below is part of it. Notice "Aug"? Why is it that Shooter Z, in November, is claiming August, yet Stabber Z, in September, is unaware of any Zodiac activity in August, as evidenced by its omission of the list of Z crimes on the car door?

Here’s yet another example. On 11/8/1969, Shooter Z wrote the dripping Pen card. Below is part of it. Notice "Aug"? Why is it that Shooter Z, in November, is claiming August, yet Stabber Z, in September, is unaware of any Zodiac activity in August, as evidenced by its omission of the list of Z crimes on the car door?

Perhaps because there was limited space on the car door and/or he didn’t want to spend an excessive sum of time writing before leaving the crime scene. It isn’t quite like safely writing a letter at home.

Here’s yet another example. On 11/8/1969, Shooter Z wrote the dripping Pen card. Below is part of it. Notice "Aug"? Why is it that Shooter Z, in November, is claiming August, yet Stabber Z, in September, is unaware of any Zodiac activity in August, as evidenced by its omission of the list of Z crimes on the car door?

Perhaps because there was limited space on the car door and/or he didn’t want to spend an excessive sum of time writing before leaving the crime scene. It isn’t quite like safely writing a letter at home.

Stabber Z had time to write Vallejo and then the dates of the publicly known attacks. He also had time to write the additional "6:30" for his own attack.

Shooter Z had time to walk to the other side of the cab, try to prop up his dead victim, wipe down the cab, and then walk down the street, all while in view of witnesses.

But Stabber Z, while chronicling his exploits, omits listing one because of the 3 or 4 additional seconds it would take to scrawl a date?

Here’s yet another example. On 11/8/1969, Shooter Z wrote the dripping Pen card. Below is part of it. Notice "Aug"? Why is it that Shooter Z, in November, is claiming August, yet Stabber Z, in September, is unaware of any Zodiac activity in August, as evidenced by its omission of the list of Z crimes on the car door?

Perhaps because there was limited space on the car door and/or he didn’t want to spend an excessive sum of time writing before leaving the crime scene. It isn’t quite like safely writing a letter at home.

Stabber Z had time to write Vallejo and then the dates of the publicly known attacks. He also had time to write the additional "6:30" for his own attack.

Shooter Z had time to walk to the other side of the cab, try to prop up his dead victim, wipe down the cab, and then walk down the street, all while in view of witnesses.

These two "different" killers sound awfully similar in their eccentricities at crime scenes.

There’s no evidence that he killed anyone in August, though. He made a lot of wild claims in his letters.

There’s no evidence that he killed anyone in August, though. He made a lot of wild claims in his letters.

So…what…he just forgot he had alluded to an August kill when he was writing on the car door? Does that seem likely to you?

Seems to defeat the purpose of trying to embellish his rep and pad his stat count…