What are a few things you believe about the murderer based on your reading or research? It doesn’t have to be a firm belief or even on a significant topic, just an impression you’ve formed for whatever reason.
In any case, I believe:
Lived in the Vallejo area (predators being less likely to hunt outside an area they were comfortable in).
Frequently read crime magazines and news accounts of murders (for example, the whole Montana Deer Lodge thing may have come from reading in Time Magazine about the riots there in the late 50’s).
Owed a drafting table (based on the precision of the spacing of letters in the coded communications).
Employed (killed on weekends).
Didn’t kill Bates (used "In the Beginning…" stamp with Apollo view of earth from moon. This mission was launched very early in the morning just after the Faraday-Jensen murders. this is his only break from the normal stamps he used, which likely were all from the same book).
i believe the stamps were all from the same book too. if we had better copies of the envelopes we might be able to piece them together. if this is a clue it would help eliminate fake letters.
i don’t think he killed bates.
i go back and forth on lb being an impostor.
I believe the killer we know as Zodiac was a seasoned killer long before 12/20/68 and continued killing after 10/11/69.
I believe Z killed Cheri Jo Bates.
I still believe the identity of Z will be found out.
i believe the stamps were all from the same book too. if we had better copies of the envelopes we might be able to piece them together. if this is a clue it would help eliminate fake letters.
i don’t think he killed bates.
i go back and forth on lb being an impostor.
I’ve never heard this theory that the LB attack was an impostor. True, the MO was different, the weapon, different. But I always thought the phone calls, letters, and graffiti all combined to weave an impenetrable web of certainty that the four confirmed attacks were in fact "confirmed".
i believe the stamps were all from the same book too. if we had better copies of the envelopes we might be able to piece them together. if this is a clue it would help eliminate fake letters.
i don’t think he killed bates.
i go back and forth on lb being an impostor.
I’ve never heard this theory that the LB attack was an impostor. True, the MO was different, the weapon, different. But I always thought the phone calls, letters, and graffiti all combined to weave an impenetrable web of certainty that the four confirmed attacks were in fact "confirmed".
the logical part of my brain says it’s zodiac because there’s a lot going on that points to him but the "wtf" part of my brain wonders why the costume, why the long story, why stabbing, etc.
whoever it was wore a costume with the zodiac symbol so he obviously wanted to appear to be the zodiac. he killed a young couple, just like zodiac. he made a phone call, just like zodiac. he wrote the dates of the other zodiac crimes on the car, but all of this was public knowledge.
what doesn’t make sense is why zodiac didn’t take credit for it directly in his letters. he mentioned it briefly once* but after he kills stine two weeks later he becomes the most prolific writing serial killer in history. most of his letters come after stine and he uses stine’s shirt to prove his identity. why the change? he was worried about impostors, he wanted to make sure his correspondence made it to the intended recipients. he took his time at lb so why not rip off a part of one of their shirts and use it? maybe the idea occurred to him afterwards, but maybe the real zodiac realized he was dealing with a copycat and used stine’s murder to make sure he didn’t lose his limelight.
i’d love feedback on the idea as i’d be glad to have something that makes the above seem more unlikely or impossible than what i’ve written.
*oct 13 letter that included a piece of stine’s shirt. he claims stine’s death and says "i am the same man who did in the people in the north bay area". that’s it, no particulars that only the killer would know like he did for lhr and brs, no grand claims, etc.
There are actually many people who question LB masootz. But heck, even Zodiac got something wrong…or he just forgot about August on the door…darn it! Whoops! If he wants to intimidate with August he should have put it on the darn door.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
1) Zodiac lied often, but was truthful at times.
2) Definetly had an issue with law enforcement…a chip on his shoulder.
3) Notoriety more-so than any "thrill" of killing. He didn’t kill as many people as he claimed
Strictly an opinion, of course.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
why the change? he was worried about impostors, he wanted to make sure his correspondence made it to the intended recipients. he took his time at lb so why not rip off a part of one of their shirts and use it? maybe the idea occurred to him afterwards, but maybe the real zodiac realized he was dealing with a copycat and used stine’s murder to make sure he didn’t lose his limelight.
This idea runs diametric to information you included further in your post:
*oct 13 letter that included a piece of stine’s shirt. he claims stine’s death and says "i am the same man who did in the people in the north bay area". that’s it, no particulars that only the killer would know like he did for lhr and brs, no grand claims, etc.
I don’t understand. Z wanted the limelight on him, didn’t want impostors around, so instead he claimed credit for the LB murders, becoming an impostor himself? Further, why did the actual LB murderer, if he wanted to be an impostor, ever challenge Z who did take credit? If the copycat and impostors goal is to copy and take credit, why would the impostor be fine with letting Z take the credit then? It just seems too strange.
However, Z does take credit for many things which are hard to believe. He takes credit for things that we cannot verify he did, and credit for actions we can’t even verify actually happened (building and planting bombs, 37 total murders, etc).
One murder we do know happened, though, was at LB. Someone was definitely murdered there. The individual who did the slaying definitely wanted everyone to think he was the Zodiac, so much that he took extra steps after the murder to demonstrate further that it was a zodiac killing. He even called the police afterwards as he was prone to do. The one step, however, that is missing, is the letters to the media.
If it were a copycat, why did he take all the extra steps afterwards?
If it were a copycat, why did he take all the extra steps afterwards?
To make people think it was Zodiac.
If he was caught, for example, and they thought he was Zodiac, but this guy was say, institutionalized, at the time of another Zodiac crime…well, couldn’t be him then.
And the same goes for Zodiac. Why deny it? It got him more news coverage. If someone else got caught for it, well…it wasn’t him and he never actually claimed it.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
If it were a copycat, why did he take all the extra steps afterwards?
To make people think it was Zodiac.
If he was caught, for example, and they thought he was Zodiac, but this guy was say, institutionalized, at the time of another Zodiac crime…well, couldn’t be him then.
And the same goes for Zodiac. Why deny it? It got him more news coverage. If someone else got caught for it, well…it wasn’t him and he never actually claimed it.
Then what’s the motive? How does the zodiac manage to pick crimes to which the perpetrator is never caught?
If it were a copycat, why did he take all the extra steps afterwards?
To make people think it was Zodiac.
If he was caught, for example, and they thought he was Zodiac, but this guy was say, institutionalized, at the time of another Zodiac crime…well, couldn’t be him then.
And the same goes for Zodiac. Why deny it? It got him more news coverage. If someone else got caught for it, well…it wasn’t him and he never actually claimed it.
Then what’s the motive? How does the zodiac manage to pick crimes to which the perpetrator is never caught?
If LB wasn’t Zodiac, he didn’t pick it.
If the guy who did it got caught, it would be obvious it wasn’t Zodiac (if Zodiac continued his thing) and Zodiac could just mock police for more bad work.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
1. I believe Cheri Bats was Zodiac’s first murder.
2. I believe Zodiac knew her "In…years prior." Probably, due to her young age, at Ramona High.
3, I believe that, at the time of Bates’ murder, Zodiac was either in the military, or recently discharged.
tahoe and doctor – good points by both of you. complete conjecture based on nothing more than guesswork – like the manson murders, someone was inspired by zodiac so they came up with an elaborate plan to kill like he did. that’s why they did the whole costume thing, because they weren’t him but wanted it to be attributed to him. on zodiac’s end he took credit for the johns car ride (i personally don’t think he was involved) and he obviously lied about other stuff. but, to doctor’s point, he managed to take "credit" for lb and no one was ever caught for it. my counterpoint would be that he didn’t take specific credit for it, he could have just intimated that the "people in the north bay area" referred to something else.
who knows, he probably did the lb attack but there are so many things about it that don’t fit, even for a serial killer who was pretty random. it’s more likely that someone who has killed twice before would be responsible for this killing but he never seems to take credit for it. of course he didn’t take credit for lhr until brs, but then there’s the silly costume, and the knife, and the elaborate story. ugh, i give up.
tahoe and doctor – good points by both of you. complete conjecture based on nothing more than guesswork – like the manson murders someone was inspired by zodiac so they came up with an elaborate plan to kill like he did. that’s why they did the whole costume thing, because they weren’t him but wanted it to be attributed to him. on zodiac’s end he took credit for the johns car ride (i personally don’t think he was involved) and he obviously lied about other stuff. but, to doctor’s point, he managed to take "credit" for lb and no one was ever caught for it. my counterpoint would be that he didn’t take specific credit for it, he could have just intimated that the "people in the north bay area" referred to something else.
who knows, he probably did the lb attack but there are so many things about it that don’t fit, even for a serial killer who was pretty random. it’s more likely that someone who has killed twice before would be responsible for this killing but he never seems to take credit for it. of course he didn’t take credit for lhr until brs, but then there’s the silly costume, and the knife, and the elaborate story. ugh, i give up.
Here’s how this case is so bizarre that nothing makes sense at all of it:
Why do you bother wearing an elaborate disguise if you plan to kill your victims to begin with?
tahoe and doctor – good points by both of you. complete conjecture based on nothing more than guesswork – like the manson murders someone was inspired by zodiac so they came up with an elaborate plan to kill like he did. that’s why they did the whole costume thing, because they weren’t him but wanted it to be attributed to him. on zodiac’s end he took credit for the johns car ride (i personally don’t think he was involved) and he obviously lied about other stuff. but, to doctor’s point, he managed to take "credit" for lb and no one was ever caught for it. my counterpoint would be that he didn’t take specific credit for it, he could have just intimated that the "people in the north bay area" referred to something else.
who knows, he probably did the lb attack but there are so many things about it that don’t fit, even for a serial killer who was pretty random. it’s more likely that someone who has killed twice before would be responsible for this killing but he never seems to take credit for it. of course he didn’t take credit for lhr until brs, but then there’s the silly costume, and the knife, and the elaborate story. ugh, i give up.
Here’s how this case is so bizarre that nothing makes sense at all of it:
Why do you bother wearing an elaborate disguise if you plan to kill your victims to begin with?
if it was the actual zodiac, the only reason to dress up like an executioner is to fulfill some end of a fantasy or because you get off on inspiring fear. the funny think about hartnell, based on his interviews, is he seemed to not really be afraid at all. that had to be disappointing to zodiac.
it it wasn’t the real zodiac then it was an homage to his/her hero. remaining anonymous but making sure the murder(s) were attributed to him.
