Podcast has been somewhat interesting. I especially liked:
1) Manner in which it presented Z as being proficient at creating terror through relatively few known killings.
2) Accurate dismissal of ALA as suspect and Graysmith’s role in disseminating false information.
Looking forward to hearing about Lawrence Kane, Gyke, Earl Van Best, Jr., and Ross Sullivan.

New episode entitled "Rabbit Holes" dropped today. Explores the obsession that many amateur Zodiologists share. Mark Hewitt, Sandy Betts, and Tom Voigt are center stage.

I was a bit disappointed because last episode, they did a teaser for this one that had Tom hinting about "new evidence" that could possibly solve the case. Nothing like that was discussed in the episode.

I have assumed all along that this "new evidence" refers to the DNA from the back of the stamp, but I’d like to know for sure. Tom has been reluctant to say.

Tom has been reluctant to say.

I believe the show was referring to a few details I mentioned off the record. If that’s the case, the info won’t be broadcast. However, I’m not exactly sure what I was referring to in that clip, seven hours of talking covers a lot of ground.

Yes Tom , Hard to believe we talked for 7 hours, but then again once we get started, 7 hrs isn’t that long when we are talking about the Zodiac case.

There are still three episodes left , so perhaps what ever it is that you said is new, will be told in the next episodes? I was sitting next to you and Angie and don’t remember what was said that was new? I guess we will have to stay tuned to find out!

Next Tuesday the 12th there will be a talk about Zodiac on the Dr. Oz show. He does crime now on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 1pm Calif time.

I am sorry I thought that I had posted about Monster pod cast on this site. My favorite episode was last week about Larry Kane and the finger print examiner. She excluded Kane with the prints found on Hartnell’s car.

What caught my attention was she said that one of those prints had a scar on the print, which reminded me of the bloody cab print. So the same person who was at Lake B was the shooter of Paul Stine.

Tom has been reluctant to say.

I believe the show was referring to a few details I mentioned off the record. If that’s the case, the info won’t be broadcast. However, I’m not exactly sure what I was referring to in that clip, seven hours of talking covers a lot of ground.

Yes, I think this is something that you have mentioned on your own Murder Basement podcast. Some new evidence that you are privy too, suggesting Zodiac was far more prolific than previously known – including more crimes and more letters that have not been made public. I think you said you were asked not to share it by LE and you wouldn’t unless given the OK by them.

I was hoping that this episode would shed more light on some of that stuff. To think that what we all know about Zodiac is only the tip of the iceberg is fascinating.

Speaking of Murder Basement…when can we expect a new episode, Tom?

yes I recently posted about the "scar" on the print at the stine scene. I picked up on this too from the podcast.

What caught my attention was she said that one of those prints had a scar on the print, which reminded me of the bloody cab print. So the same person who was at Lake B was the shooter of Paul Stine.

Extremely important if forensics could prove this. Enough of the nonsense theories about LB being an impostor. And more importantly, relevant to a trial if he is alive.

Another question is, how would one acquire a scar deep enough to show up on a fingerprint?

Could it point to a manual job or military background.

Speaking of Murder Basement…when can we expect a new episode, Tom?

Thanks for asking, I’ve been sidetracked with so many distractions, and now I have a cold and my voice is shot. Plus the next one will be long with a ton of new info. I am hoping within two weeks.

What caught my attention was she said that one of those prints had a scar on the print, which reminded me of the bloody cab print. So the same person who was at Lake B was the shooter of Paul Stine.

Extremely important if forensics could prove this. Enough of the nonsense theories about LB being an impostor. And more importantly, relevant to a trial if he is alive.

So, do the prints match???

Couldn’t a "scar" on a fingerprint just be the result of a smudge, blade of grass on a finger, or in the case of a cab print, a little glue?

Unless the prints match, I don’t think two prints that have defects that could possibly be scars means it’s necessarily the same guy. Unless the "scars" match, which would, I guess, be another way to say the prints match.

I am going by what the expert said.
If that is the same finger with the scar in the exact spot, then it would have to be from the same person. I don’t have the print she was talking about.

I do have Kane’s hand prints and none of those have a scar.

Another question is, how would one acquire a scar deep enough to show up on a fingerprint?

Could it point to a manual job or military background.

It could just as easily mean he cut himself making a salad, or had an accident with a hook while fishing as a little boy.

Another question is, how would one acquire a scar deep enough to show up on a fingerprint?

Could it point to a manual job or military background.

It could just as easily mean he cut himself making a salad, or had an accident with a hook while fishing as a little boy.

It could. I just find it interesting that it could suggest a hands-on person or just someone a bit reckless in every day life.