My leaning is the “Riverside Activity” communication style was an attempt to be deceptive in a different way. That was a personal one of a kind crime and his attempt was to obfuscate that by leading authorities to believe that it was just one of many impersonal crimes.

I got as far as:

"Zodiac likely wanted the reader to infer that he meant the composite drawing, but in statement analysis, we do not assume anything."

By using the word "likely," you are, in fact, assuming.

If it wasn’t an assumption, there would be no need for "likely" to be included.

I got as far as:

"Zodiac likely wanted the reader to infer that he meant the composite drawing, but in statement analysis, we do not assume anything."

By using the word "likely," you are, in fact, assuming.

If it wasn’t an assumption, there would be no need for "likely" to be included.

Yeah, but did you know Zodiac was a liar? Because that’s a stunning revelation. No one knew that before, the case is going to really take off now.

This guy is now on reddit falsely claiming there are matching fingerprints from the various Zodiac letters and crime scenes. His proof? A quote from an old newspaper article, which everyone should know by now can’t be trusted, as those old articles are routinely filled with errors.

And my favorite part:

"In science, you can never be 100% certain of anything. However, the best hypothesis is that the Zodiac left prints. This will remain the best one until evidence refutes it."

So in "science," assumptions are the foundation!

Move over scientific method, there’s a new gun it town.

If that were the case, Allen would have been definitively ruled out 50 years ago.