1) I’ve never seen those criticisms of the handwriting analysis in the case.
2) Even if they are valid, we’re confusing admissability and persuasiveness. If you have DNA with a 1 in 600 match, you’re probably right 599 times to 1. But sometimes it wouldn’t be admissible. Similarly lie detectors.
3) The Confession letter and the phone call mentioned in it are classic Zodiac.
4) IIRC, the FBI basically said – paraphrasing – there was too much disguise of the handwriting for a full confirmation. But Morrill was right.

Well, apart from Morrill and Shimoda, and the original FBI analyses, SFPD re-submitted Zodiac material to the FBI lab in May 1978, and here’s what they said at the time:

Specifically, this was done at the request of the San Francisco Chief of Police. Shimoda’s recent debunking of the Riverside letters spurred them to seek another opinion. I don’t recall WHY Shimoda examined the Riverside letters at that particular point in time, unless it was blowback from the Herb Caen letter (too soon for that?). I looked into this last year and was confused about the details.

The handwriting is one thing, but let’s not forget that two of three "Bates had to die" letters were signed with a "Z". I know it has a little squiggle. Think about how many serial killers are active at any one time, then think about the "Z", the fact that Zodiac claimed the killing and the overall similarly of the cases with respect to letter writing and phone calls. Is it reasonable to be so incredulous? I think it’s fair to say that it is highly likely that the Zodiac killed Bates. Can we be certain? No. But why such doubts?

The handwriting is one thing, but let’s not forget that two of three "Bates had to die" letters were signed with a "Z". I know it has a little squiggle. Think about how many serial killers are active at any one time, then think about the "Z", the fact that Zodiac claimed the killing and the overall similarly of the cases with respect to letter writing and phone calls. Is it reasonable to be so incredulous? I think it’s fair to say that it is highly likely that the Zodiac killed Bates. Can we be certain? No. But why such doubts?

I can’t say for certain that Riverside wasn’t Zodiac. But there is certainly plenty of reason and room to doubt.

Yes, plenty of weak reasons. A whole of lot putting weak arguments on the same footing as strong ones. You can have a thousand weak reasons you don’t think it was Z. It’s nothing more than "spray and pray". I don’t place any weight on the hand writing analysis, it’s as underwhelming as most of the counter arguments. There are two pieces of evidence that stand out as being vastly more noteworthy than anything else:

1) "Z" like signature on two letters

2) The killer wrote letters and made phone calls. (the author claimed he made call, does it matter if it’s true?)

That alone should be more than enough to place the odds well over 50%. Most everything else that is discussed, whether for, or against just pales in comparison. Do I think it’s enough to convict someone? Of course not. I’m not talking about reasonable doubt, I’m talking about likelihood. Is it likely that two killers, operating in the same state three years apart would both sign letters with such a similar moniker? This is the same basic argument Paul Avery made over 50 years ago and in 50 years no one has made a better argument for, or against. Everything else is just quibbling over minor details to satisfy some intellectual desire to argue over… it’s just pedantic. The guy signed the letter with a "Z", what more do you really want?

According to Scientific American, there are between 25 and 50 serial killers who are active in the United States at any given time. I read recently that Thomas Hargrove, founder of MAP places the number at closer to 200. Also, it’s a 3 year period. I’m a reasonable guy, Hargrove could be right and Riverside is a 6 hour drive from San Fran, so maybe the odds of two killers using a similar moniker… who am I kidding, the odds are clearly low. Low odds doesn’t prove anything, but the level of incredulity some have is at odds with the basic odds, based solely on the facts and without all the years of speculation that’s been heaped on top. He wrote letters, claimed to make a phone call, and signed it two letters with a "Z", please see reason, it’s very likely Zodiac killed Cheri Jo.

That Zodiac might or might not have killed Cheri Bates is, to me, a secondary consideration. IMO, her murder deserves to be solved, period. Were it not for RPD’s obsession with "Bob Barnett" this crime would have been solved long ago. As it is, indications are that Cheri’s killer knew her; attended Ramona High when she did; lived in Riverside; and was familiar with RCC college. Also, there is a good possibility that his initials are RH.
As I’ve said before, I’d give my eye teeth (which are ceramic) to eyeball her diary. Has anyone had an opportunity to read it? Or knows someone who has? And is there any way in hell RPD can be persuaded or forced to open its files?

Yes, plenty of weak reasons. A whole of lot putting weak arguments on the same footing as strong ones. You can have a thousand weak reasons you don’t think it was Z. It’s nothing more than "spray and pray". I don’t place any weight on the hand writing analysis, it’s as underwhelming as most of the counter arguments. There are two pieces of evidence that stand out as being vastly more noteworthy than anything else:

1) "Z" like signature on two letters

2) The killer wrote letters and made phone calls. (the author claimed he made call, does it matter if it’s true?)

That alone should be more than enough to place the odds well over 50%. Most everything else that is discussed, whether for, or against just pales in comparison. Do I think it’s enough to convict someone? Of course not. I’m not talking about reasonable doubt, I’m talking about likelihood. Is it likely that two killers, operating in the same state three years apart would both sign letters with such a similar moniker? This is the same basic argument Paul Avery made over 50 years ago and in 50 years no one has made a better argument for, or against. Everything else is just quibbling over minor details to satisfy some intellectual desire to argue over… it’s just pedantic. The guy signed the letter with a "Z", what more do you really want?

According to Scientific American, there are between 25 and 50 serial killers who are active in the United States at any given time. I read recently that Thomas Hargrove, founder of MAP places the number at closer to 200. Also, it’s a 3 year period. I’m a reasonable guy, Hargrove could be right and Riverside is a 6 hour drive from San Fran, so maybe the odds of two killers using a similar moniker… who am I kidding, the odds are clearly low. Low odds doesn’t prove anything, but the level of incredulity some have is at odds with the basic odds, based solely on the facts and without all the years of speculation that’s been heaped on top. He wrote letters, claimed to make a phone call, and signed it two letters with a "Z", please see reason, it’s very likely Zodiac killed Cheri Jo.

Agree to disagree, I suppose. I don’t see multiple handwriting analysts disputing Morrill’s assertions as "weak". I don’t see a poem about suicide written at an unknown time on a college campus as "strong".

Also, where you see a "Z", I see a lower case "m" and a capital "L".

Cheers.

This debate is unusually tedious. We could catch him standing over the body with the Zodiac hood and some people would still say it wasn’t a Z crime.

This debate is unusually tedious. We could catch him standing over the body with the Zodiac hood and some people would still say it wasn’t a Z crime.

Perhaps that’s because some people are not entirely certain the guy in the "Zodiac hood" actually was Zodiac…

Yes this is it, the FBI document shows that it appears to them that a single author may have done all of the writing. Q85 through QC100 are all of the confirmed Z letters & all of the Riverside writings. It also states that it appears the author wrote in diff styles at diff speeds

"Consistent hand printing characteristics were noted in the Q85 through QC100 letters which indicate that one person may have prepared ALL of the letters INCLUDING THE RIVERSIDE LETTERS AND THE MESSAGE FOUND ON THE DESKTOP IN THE RIVERSIDE CASE"

Also, where you see a "Z", I see a lower case "m" and a capital "L".

Cheers.

And I as well.

Soze