There are two things that make me think Berryessa could be a copycat;
The first is the nature of the attack(knife,daylight,costume) is clearly different.
The second is more subtle; Why did he send a piece of Paul Stine’s shirt with his next letter? Is he upset that a copycat did Berryessa and he really wanted to emphasize that the Stine murder was a real Z murder? Think about it,if he wanted to send proof with his letters,it would have been a lot easier to cut off a piece off Cecilia Shepards dress and mail that,then have to scramble at a crime scene with more potential witnesses on a city street,to cut off a piece of Stine’s shirt. Maybe the copycat at Berryessa set Z off and now he felt like he needed to mail proof with his letters. If it was a copycat,I’m sure Z wouldnt be too happy creating a costume out of his identity!

Let’s suppose for a minute that he didn’t send pieces of Stine’s shirt in the mail. Which of his four canonical crimes would most likely be mistaken as "not Z?" Clearly, in the absence of the shirt, Stine would be debated legitimately for years–in the public AND in law enforcement. So, the failure to take clothing at LB is not an indication that LB was not a Z crime.

I can reasonably envision Z reviewing his options before Stine like this: "They can’t deny it was me at LHR and BRS because I wrote a letter saying things ‘that only the killer would know.’ They can’t deny it was me a LB because Hartnell survived and told about the costume (and maybe others saw me in it, which was really my goal all along). I also wrote the dates of the other crimes on the door of his crime. How can I make them believe it was me if I kill a cab driver? They will think it was just a random robbery. [Lightbulb in head]. I know! I’ll cut pieces of his bloody shirt and mail them."

We look back on the crimes with a perspective he didn’t have. We know everything that happened later. He wasn’t omniscient. He just took steps to make sure credit was given when credit was due. Failure to follow a pattern simply does not disqualify a crime from being canonical.

Yeah we don’t tie crimes together by M.O. at this level of complexity. We tie crimes together by emotional signature.

The Zodiac’s emotional signature is to taunt society, especially LE and newspapers, by communicating with them often with puzzles alluding to his identity.

That’s it. It’s his emotional need. This ‘game’.

LHR doesn’t directly have that signature. BRS, LB and PH have this signature. LHR is tied in due to M.O. and the killer claiming responsibility but is the weakest of the four, not LB.

If I was to guess why he is changing M.O., the death wheel seems to explain it. It looks like he is planning how they will die based on the roll of the wheel. Seems 3 were By Gun and 1 By Knife.

At least that’s what I get from it all. That this is the ‘game’. Obviously he enjoys games. Which is evident from his scorecard claims.

I am seriously considering that somehow he made them pick their choice of death. That he met them before somewhere and unbeknownst to them they picked how they will die.

My guess is that he is showing up at functions playing card games.

There are two things that make me think Berryessa could be a copycat;
The first is the nature of the attack(knife,daylight,costume) is clearly different.
The second is more subtle; Why did he send a piece of Paul Stine’s shirt with his next letter? Is he upset that a copycat did Berryessa and he really wanted to emphasize that the Stine murder was a real Z murder? Think about it,if he wanted to send proof with his letters,it would have been a lot easier to cut off a piece off Cecilia Shepards dress and mail that,then have to scramble at a crime scene with more potential witnesses on a city street,to cut off a piece of Stine’s shirt. Maybe the copycat at Berryessa set Z off and now he felt like he needed to mail proof with his letters. If it was a copycat,I’m sure Z wouldnt be too happy creating a costume out of his identity!

Let’s suppose for a minute that he didn’t send pieces of Stine’s shirt in the mail. Which of his four canonical crimes would most likely be mistaken as "not Z?" Clearly, in the absence of the shirt, Stine would be debated legitimately for years–in the public AND in law enforcement. So, the failure to take clothing at LB is not an indication that LB was not a Z crime.

I can reasonably envision Z reviewing his options before Stine like this: "They can’t deny it was me at LHR and BRS because I wrote a letter saying things ‘that only the killer would know.’ They can’t deny it was me a LB because Hartnell survived and told about the costume (and maybe others saw me in it, which was really my goal all along). I also wrote the dates of the other crimes on the door of his crime. How can I make them believe it was me if I kill a cab driver? They will think it was just a random robbery. [Lightbulb in head]. I know! I’ll cut pieces of his bloody shirt and mail them."

We look back on the crimes with a perspective he didn’t have. We know everything that happened later. He wasn’t omniscient. He just took steps to make sure credit was given when credit was due. Failure to follow a pattern simply does not disqualify a crime from being canonical.

Absolutely bang on.

Seems the jurisdictions that worked the four attacks, LHR, BRS, LB and Stine readily consider them all the work of the same person but are reluctant to include other suspected Zodiac attacks, such as CJB, Lompoc, etc. I think it’s possible they have hard evidence connecting those four that we don’t know about.

IThinkIKnow showed how Zodiac provided evidence linking himself to each crime to the best of his ability, even if it isn’t enough for some. He gave details only known to him and the police for Lake Herman Road and Blue Rock Springs. He took his writings to the crime scene at Berryessa and made another phone call. He took the crime scene to his writings at Presidio Heights, effectively reversing his tactic at Berryessa. Under the Zodiac umbrella, he provided no evidence to link himself to Richard Radetich, Kathleen Johns, Donna Lass or Cheri Jo Bates, when he had every opportunity to do so. This shift from feeling compelled to prove he was the perpetrator in each crime, to providing nothing, is extremely telling.

Under the Zodiac umbrella, he provided no evidence to link himself to Richard Radetich, Kathleen Johns, Donna Lass or Cheri Jo Bates, when he had every opportunity to do so. This shift from feeling compelled to prove he was the perpetrator in each crime, to providing nothing, is extremely telling.

I just want to point out, he did lay claim to CJB and the "confession letter", according to police, had details only the killer would know. I’m a bit on the fence about CJB being Zodiac but I tend to think he was responsible. So if we consider CJB as a Zodiac victim he did provide some proof. That fits the other four.

Let’s suppose for a minute that he didn’t send pieces of Stine’s shirt in the mail. Which of his four canonical crimes would most likely be mistaken as "not Z?" Clearly, in the absence of the shirt, Stine would be debated legitimately for years–in the public AND in law enforcement. So, the failure to take clothing at LB is not an indication that LB was not a Z crime.

The single gunshot behind Stine’s ear from very close range is close to identical to the way David Faraday was killed. There are a couple dozen ways LB is different from the 3 shootings.

I can reasonably envision Z reviewing his options before Stine like this: "They can’t deny it was me at LHR and BRS because I wrote a letter saying things ‘that only the killer would know.’ They can’t deny it was me a LB because Hartnell survived and told about the costume (and maybe others saw me in it, which was really my goal all along). I also wrote the dates of the other crimes on the door of his crime.

Hartnell saying some idiot was wearing a bizarre costume, who then wrote on his car door does not prove it was Shooter Z. Anybody could put on a hood and bib and write that stuff on the car door – no way it had to be Shooter Z. If he wanted to make sure nobody could deny it was him, why not write details in another letter, since it worked so well for LHR and BRS?

How can I make them believe it was me if I kill a cab driver? They will think it was just a random robbery. [Lightbulb in head]. I know! I’ll cut pieces of his bloody shirt and mail them."

He does what worked so well for LHR and BRS – he sends proof in the form of a taunting letter. Did he suddenly forget how to do that after LB, then suddenly remember 2 weeks later after PH? This guy didn’t need to struggle to figure out a way to prove he was the killer. He had that figured out with his very first letter.

We look back on the crimes with a perspective he didn’t have. We know everything that happened later. He wasn’t omniscient. He just took steps to make sure credit was given when credit was due. Failure to follow a pattern simply does not disqualify a crime from being canonical.

The shootings are all proven positively by letters that include details and/or evidence only the killer had. This did not happen at LB. No proof was given that it was the same guy. Him using the Z emblem means nothing as anyone could’ve done that. Could be the same guy but the point is, could easily be someone different.

IThinkIKnow showed how Zodiac provided evidence linking himself to each crime to the best of his ability, even if it isn’t enough for some. He gave details only known to him and the police for Lake Herman Road and Blue Rock Springs. He took his writings to the crime scene at Berryessa and made another phone call. He took the crime scene to his writings at Presidio Heights, effectively reversing his tactic at Berryessa. Under the Zodiac umbrella, he provided no evidence to link himself to Richard Radetich, Kathleen Johns, Donna Lass or Cheri Jo Bates, when he had every opportunity to do so. This shift from feeling compelled to prove he was the perpetrator in each crime, to providing nothing, is extremely telling.

"He took his writings to the crime scene at Berryessa and made another phone call." Again, this only proves the killer at LB was the killer at LB. "His writings…" Dates of the Z shootings and the Z symbol, nothing that wasn’t commonly known. And anyone who thinks they can do worthwhile handwriting analysis with the small number of letters drawn on that car door is fooling themself. With all the unconfirmed, but possible Z letters that are a full page or more in length, if they can’t be determined one way or the other by the experts, that car door can’t either.

I just want to point out, he did lay claim to CJB and the "confession letter", according to police, had details only the killer would know. I’m a bit on the fence about CJB being Zodiac but I tend to think he was responsible. So if we consider CJB as a Zodiac victim he did provide some proof. That fits the other four.

He did not provide any proof he killed CJB; he just strongly implied he did. And he talked about giving Kathleen Johns an interesting ride, and when talking about his "Riverside activity" he also said LE was only finding the easy ones – that there were a hell of a lot more down there. So, I suppose some could say he was claiming Domingos and Edwards too (and who knows, maybe Sharon Tate?)

Point is, there are generalities, including claims and his numerical score card, but when it comes to actually giving indisputable proof that only the killer could know, and tying that together with his letters, he proves LHR, BRS, and PH, and that is all.

The single gunshot behind Stine’s ear from very close range is close to identical to the way David Faraday was killed. There are a couple dozen ways LB is different from the 3 shootings.

He shot Stine if front of his ear, not behind.

I just want to point out, he did lay claim to CJB and the "confession letter", according to police, had details only the killer would know. I’m a bit on the fence about CJB being Zodiac but I tend to think he was responsible. So if we consider CJB as a Zodiac victim he did provide some proof. That fits the other four.

He did not provide any proof he killed CJB; he just strongly implied he did.

Read what I said again, IF he did kill Bates the confession letter had details only the killer would have known, according to police. So, that would be the proof he provided, IF he killed Bates.

Marshall, you stated "The shootings are all proven positively by letters that include details and/or evidence only the killer had". You need to tell this to certain members of the Zodiac community who don’t believe the Stine murder was Zodiac and others who claim an inside job by police at LHR and BRS.

Unfortunately, we have reached a point in human history, that as long as people can come up with a thousand less plausible alternatives, or alternatives devoid of evidence compared to the original premise, unfortunately nothing is provable anymore. If I am to be convinced that Zodiac wasn’t responsible for Lake Berryessa, which is the overriding consensus because of the car door and payphone call, I want more than somebody else could have made the phone call, somebody else could have written on the car door, Zodiac didn’t write a letter therefore it couldn’t be him, Zodiac (having committed only two crimes at this juncture) could not have committed this because it was daylight, used a knife, wore a costume.

The Zodiac had effectively fired off 3 communications on July 31st 1969. Had Jack Stiltz not urged him to send more details, it’s extremely likely no August 4th 1969 letter would have arrived and the killer wouldn’t have been called Zodiac throughout his four canonical attacks. So, we would have had an unnamed killer, having written on one day only, with people stating his lack of writing after September 27th 1969, is proof it’s not him. He thought the writing on the car door and payphone call was enough. He was wrong, the costume, payphone call and writing on the car door wasn’t enough. And neither was the proof he sent on July 31st 1969, or the shirt piece mailed two days after the murder of Stine. Let’s be realistic, he could have sent the taxicab keys, driving license and took a photograph of himself at each crime scene, and people would still be shouting hoaxer from the rooftops. I just want evidence to prove the existence of this hoaxer, copycat or third person, rather than what the Zodiac failed to do, or did differently. I still don’t understand why a serial killer is bound by some unwritten code to perform the same murders forever and a day, and why he is compelled to write after every crime (which Rader didn’t do either).

You are correct "it could be somebody different", but the payphone call, car door, daylight attack and knife isn’t proof it is somebody different. If it can be proved Zodiac is incapable of any these actions, then I might reassess my position.

I still don’t understand why a serial killer is bound by some unwritten code to perform the same murders forever and a day, and why he is compelled to write after every crime (which Rader didn’t do either).

He isn’t. But, using your logic above, law enforcement has been wasting their time all these years, profiling, looking for similarities between crimes, trying to identify a killer’s MO. Because any killer can commit any crime. Any witness can misjudge a person’s age by 10 or more years.

Why do we need handwriting experts to analyze the letters? A killer can write with either hand, use different styles, different phrases, or write while on medications or off. It’s pointless to even attempt to distinguish between them unless/until there becomes a scientific way to do so – DNA or something else.

What we have is, if a guy calls himself Zodiac during the year of the killings and for many years after, then he is the Zodiac. Period. That is the consensus. There is no proof otherwise.

You are correct "it could be somebody different", but the payphone call, car door, daylight attack and knife isn’t proof it is somebody different. If it can be proved Zodiac is incapable of any these actions, then I might reassess my position.

I didn’t say there was "proof" one way or the other. I’m saying there is a ton of circumstantial stuff that indicates it is a real possibility/probability.

The fact you "might" reassess your position if there was proof is a big concession. I think that is as close as we’ll come to agreeing.

OK Marshall, we will call it a day on Berryessa. Always great having a chat.

OK Marshall, we will call it a day on Berryessa. Always great having a chat.

[Mark and Richard have a virtual, social distancing handshake]

I did enjoy the debate too. After 50 years of frustration, all that’s left for us is to speculate and debate, while waiting for DNA or other hard evidence to actually solve some of the mysteries. And if everybody agreed on everything we wouldn’t even have that.

It is obvious that Zodiac had changed his MO like he said he would do later. Shooting couples in blitz attacks probably became boring for him, after a few of those, he wanted to up the game and do something that has never been done before by any serial killer. He has a strong need to be remembered as a serial killer who outsmarted the police and got away with murder. He was probably degraded as a young boy by his mother, like Edward Kemper was? That was why Zodiac centered his attention mostly on the females,perhaps he hated them because they were like his mother in his mind?

In August 1969 Zodiac was no longer front page news! It was Manson who was on the front page of every newspapers every day. That has to be when Zodiac conjured up the idea for his costume with his "logo", to put the fear of God into his Lake Berryessa victims. Except they were the sort of people who don’t watch that sort of thing on TV, or in the newspapers, I don’t think Bryan and Cecelia had information about the Zodiac killer. That’s why they didn’t show any real fear until they saw that knife!

I doubt that Zodiac ever felt he had to give proof that he was the Lake B killer. No one disputed that attack being anyone other than the Zodiac! The phone calls were a part of Zodiacs MO as well as attacking young lovers. I have my own personal reasons for believing that was a Zodiac crime and not some copycat. Bryan thought the hood was made of material, because it was the same color as the bib. Yet he also said that it looked like a "paper sack".He was able to see the killers jacket collar, proving that it was like I said, in two parts not one solid piece!

Sorry it posted twice , others were posted when I was and I was asked if I still wanted to post, I did and somehow it posted twice. Perhaps a mod or Morf can take the last one off? I tried to edit it out , no luck with that.

Sorry it posted twice , others were posted when I was and I was asked if I still wanted to post, I did and somehow it posted twice. Perhaps a mod or Morf can take the last one off? I tried to edit it out , no luck with that.

Sandy, deleted one of the double posts for you.

Zam*