You do not need to take our guys at their word.

Good, because I don’t. In fact, I think you’re a troll.

Presenting outdated "evidence" is not going to help these fine up-and-coming investigators on this forum solve the mystery of the Zodiac.

Well if we are talking 2021, nothing but DNA will motivate a prosecutor to bring charges. I am surprised your "guys" didn’t know that.

And now he begins with the denigration. It is a shame that you think I am a troll for disagreeing with you. Did you research what I said or are you just responding immaturely?

As for the DNA, we were not discussing DNA; we were discussing no link between Bates and the Zodiac. Taking a left turn when the conversation was going right, is no way to support your position in a debate. You have no idea what we know. You apparently also don’t know many cases are solved without DNA. Like you, we are not trying to solve this case. We only use it for training purposes so whether a prosecutor takes the case or not is of little consequence to us. We have, though, closed cases with confessions so there is always that route if the Zodiac is still alive, right?

Now, you’re not going to troll me on this site are you? And you’re not going to boot all of our guys off your site because we disagree with you, are you?

Back to the topic…

What did you find out about QDE’s or FDE’s? Did you discover that comparison can only be made to a degree of certainty with like mediums? Or are you sticking with Sherwood Morrill? The guy was good for his time but times and methods (and challenges to methods in court) have changed. We’re just trying to peacefully spread what we know, so that others can check for themselves and reach their own conclusions.

Satisfied? Or do you think we are still trolls? Really, you don’t need to respond if it’s not necessary. I just want you to show why our comments on the Bates investigation are nonsense.

It is a shame that you think I am a troll for disagreeing with you.

That’s not why I think you’re a troll.

You have no idea what we know.

THAT is why I think you’re a troll.

Or do you think we are still trolls?

I know so.

Or do you think we are still trolls?

I know so.

Goodness gracious, Voigt. Mature a little, alright?

In my experience, when debating an individual and individual B resorts to name calling, then individual A has won the debate. Unless you have anything else to add concerning the Bates investigation, I would like to move on.

You can continue to troll us if you like. It’s your time.

You win, Sherwood Morrill won’t have anything to do with a potential Zodiac trial. But it’s mainly because he’s been dead for decades.

When are you going to come visit me?

I just want you to show why our comments on the Bates investigation are nonsense.

I agree, your comments are nonsense!

RH was the signature on the desktop poem. And it was hidden on the underside of a desk, so it wasn’t for public consumption.

on the Halloween card (I think), there’s the line about " … you ache to know my name … " Why does he write it so awkwardly? To make the pun with "ache" which is also "H"

Hello, Nora.

First, there is no evidence linking Bates to the Zodiac.

Second, there is no evidence linking the desk top poem to the Zodiac.

Third, there is no evidence linking the desk top poem to Bates.

You would not get far trying to solve the Zodiac mystery looking for subjects whose initials are "RH."

I think someone corrected you further down but the bates letters & desktop ARE linked to Zodiac via writing. Sherwood Morrill stated that clearly and the FBI backs it up. If you want to argue that no physical evidence links Bates to Zodiac that’s fair enough(then again, we don’t know what evidence there is behind the scenes)

So Nora,

The reasons why the desk top poem cannot be linked to the Zodiac are as follows.

The poem was scratched into the desk using a ball point pen. If the writer had simply written on the desk, there would have been a significantly better chance of validating the authorship, similar to validating the writing on Hartnell’s car door with the Zodiac letter. Still, even with Hartnell’s door, a document examiner would not be able to say positively the author was the Zodiac. The writing link was made with the totality of evidence. It’s never a single piece of evidence that seals a case; it is a collection of evidence, which is how Allen was ruled out, even without the DNA.

So, because of the carving aspect, it should not have been positively linked to Zodiac.

The second reason is handwriting, like other forensics (including DNA) is never absolute. Forensics, like investigators, deal in probabilities and plausibility’s whereas online sleuths deal in possibilities and conclusions. I am almost positive that you have watched a forensic show or two where they announce a DNA link in terms of probabilities such as, "The probability of the DNA belonging to someone else is 1 in 6 billion." What they don’t say is, "We can positively state the DNA is his."

It is the same thing with handwriting exemplars. A QDE can say there are a number of specific handwriting characteristics that are unique to the letter and the suspect, but a QDE would be foolish to say, "Yep, he wrote it." Remember the QDE making such a claim in "The Most Dangerous Animal of All?"

Making positive connections rather than probable or plausible connections is an easy way to lose credibility.

It was different in 1970 when Morrill concluded the Zodiac authored the letters. In fact, a number of QDE’s disagreed with Morrill but most of them have been lost to time and the reputation of Morrill. Today, however, RPD would not be able to say with any amount of confidence the Zodiac authored any of the letters or desk top poem.

Continuing with the poem, what even links it to the Bates homicide? That tentative link was based on Morrill’s flawed analysis of the etching, and LE’s flawed conclusion that the Zodiac killed Bates. By removing the poem from the Zodiac’s repertoire, what conclusively links the Zodiac to Bates, and what conclusively links the poem to Bates?

Nothing in the poem describes Bates; a slew of coed stabbings was happening up and down the east and west coasts, and points in between. Concerning the typed confession and the "Bates had to die" letters, the Zodiac was not the first person to write the newspaper and police, nor was he the last. Every serial killer writing the press and police cannot be presumptively connected. What we do know about the Zodiac is he never typed a letter so the "Confession" letter cannot be compared with with his "type-manship" and he never wrote in pencil on lined paper so the "Bates" letters cannot be plausibly linked or compared. Additionally, the Zodiac never wrote a family member and I don’t believe he ever addressed a victim by name, as in the Bates letters. I’m pretty sure the Zodiac referred to his victims as "those kids, the cab driver, the lady and her baby…" I could be wrong on that, so it’s always good to research a little yourself.

Finally, aside from Lake Berryessa, the other killings were ambush type killings, cowardly even. Berryessa was the only place where evidence and witnesses exist that point to a direct confrontation between killer and victim. In fact, it was because of this that RPD initially believed that there may have been a connection between Bates and Berryessa stabbings and inquiries were made as early as 1969, but prints from both cases could not be linked; footprints from both cases could not be linked; and handwriting was not linked. It wasn’t until 1970 (don’t quote me) that a reporter tried to link the Zodiac to the Bates case, and suddenly, Morrill matches the handwriting, the Bates letters are tampered with, and the Zodiac is taking credit for his "Riverside activity," still not naming the victim by name. Some investigators even began to agree the Zodiac was responsible because it’s easier to pin a cold case on a known killer than to properly investigate it. I refer you to Ottis Toole and Henry Lee Lucas for a great example of Law Enforcement closing cases without properly investigating them.

Anyway, there is a lot of information on this site, and some good information on Voigt’s site if you overlook the "definitive Zodiac victim" stuff and focus on the evidence. You can also research on a number of neutral sites that have no agenda and glean more information.

Good luck, and sorry for the lengthy response.

It wasn’t until 1970 (don’t quote me) that a reporter tried to link the Zodiac to the Bates case, and suddenly, Morrill matches the handwriting, the Bates letters are tampered with, and the Zodiac is taking credit for his "Riverside activity"

Well that’s some serious rubbish.

It wasn’t until 1970 (don’t quote me) that a reporter tried to link the Zodiac to the Bates case, and suddenly, Morrill matches the handwriting, the Bates letters are tampered with, and the Zodiac is taking credit for his "Riverside activity"

Well that’s some serious rubbish.

Not sure what this guy was talking about

RH was the signature on the desktop poem. And it was hidden on the underside of a desk, so it wasn’t for public consumption.

on the Halloween card (I think), there’s the line about " … you ache to know my name … " Why does he write it so awkwardly? To make the pun with "ache" which is also "H"

Hello, Nora.

First, there is no evidence linking Bates to the Zodiac.

Second, there is no evidence linking the desk top poem to the Zodiac.

Third, there is no evidence linking the desk top poem to Bates.

You would not get far trying to solve the Zodiac mystery looking for subjects whose initials are "RH."

I think someone corrected you further down but the bates letters & desktop ARE linked to Zodiac via writing. Sherwood Morrill stated that clearly and the FBI backs it up. If you want to argue that no physical evidence links Bates to Zodiac that’s fair enough(then again, we don’t know what evidence there is behind the scenes)

Where did the FBI confirm Morrill’s findings?

There are several pages of FBI reports around here, that based on their analysis, Morrill is correct

There are several pages of FBI reports around here, that based on their analysis, Morrill is correct

I’ll have to look around for those. Still, there have been several handwriting experts who have disputes Morrill’s conclusions.

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=968&hilit=morrill+fbi+poem

Bates FBI Reports