Can anyone get the old timeline to work?

http://web.archive.org/web/20110804030457/http://www.zodiacmovie.com/timeline/

Click on "Click to Enter" under "Zodiac Timeline". When I click the dots on the timelines, it zooms away like it’s going to load the items, but it just sits there.

Does it work for anyone else?

Can anyone get the old timeline to work?

http://web.archive.org/web/20110804030457/http://www.zodiacmovie.com/timeline/

Click on "Click to Enter" under "Zodiac Timeline". When I click the dots on the timelines, it zooms away like it’s going to load the items, but it just sits there.

Does it work for anyone else?

Same thing for me

Ditto, tried turning off pop up blockers and changing flash settings … nada.

OK – I think the Flash timeline is trying to retrieve additional content when you click a dot. Then it fails because the additional content wasn’t backed up by the wayback machine.

According to Chrome’s network sniffer, when you click on one of the timeline entries, it tries to fetch another Flash file. For example:

http://web.archive.org/web/20110804030457/http://www.zodiacmovie.com/timeline/y_1966/1_11_29_1966.swf

But that fails because it just redirects to the Paramount main site. The web archive probably didn’t make a copy of that file since it’s not easily noticed by their site crawler.

YAY, here’s the Rossmo video:
http://www.zodiacmovie.com /”> http://web.archive.org/web/200901141939 … movie.com/

Click on ‘geographic profiling’. They even allow you to download the video!

Rossmo states, that if Zodiac was active today, "it would not be too difficult to find this person"

Also of interest, are the other videos for ‘linguistic analysis’ (they look at ALA’s writing habits…word breaks etc, would be very intgeresting when looking at other suspects like manalli with odd habits in writing),and view the ‘behavioral profiling’ as well.

I can’t believe I have never seen this video! Too bad it wasn’t included in the documentary.

It was nice to hear something I have always believed….Zodiac’s focus (or at least main "issue") was the Vallejo area. He was always associated with SF and that always bugged me!

We can also look at the Nights and Weekends in which these four crime scenes are committed. White Male adult, living in the
east Bay Area, who has a job? Goes to School?

Perhaps I’m in error but I am a bit confused with Rossmo’s findings or rather the accompanying Graphics. I accept ( and personally agree) that on the balance of available evidence that Z may have lived in West/North West Vallejo. What I find curious are the Graphics or more precisely the two apparent " Hot Spots" ( the red peak areas).
In Northern vallejo, one identifies a small area in American Canyon and to the south of Vallejo, an area North west of Martinez is highlighted.
Problem (or not) is that when these are superimposed on the map both areas are rural, with very little homes/houses. If, per chance, he was correct there wouldn’t be too many residences to check out.
Maybe the graphics were just used for effect, dunno! He himself identifies Rancho vallejo and Mare Island

Rossmo mentions the "rancho Vallejo" section of Vallejo. I used to have a map of rancho Vallejo. Maybe one of the Bay Area people here can break it down

Zodiac sent 14 consecutive letters with San Francisco postmarks from July 31, 1969 to October 27, 1970. Three of these letters had weekend postmarks — Bus bomb with Sunday PM, Belli letter with Saturday PM, and Little List with Sunday PM.

ZODIAC’S AGE
I have done careful research and have found the following eyewitness reports or earwitness reports of the Zodiac Killer’s Age.
These are compiled strictly from Police Reports. Please follow closely.
LHR No witnesses

BRS Mike Mageau survivor reports Zodiac as being between 26-30 years old, this is right after the attack

Lake Berryessa Hartnell survivor reports Zodiac as sounding between 20 to 30 years of age by voice concept
Police operator D.Slaight says the caller taking responsibility for LB is a male, young, sounding in his early twenties.

San Francisco two teenagers age 14 and 13 report Zodiac as being between 25 to 30 years old
First Composite puts Zodiac at 25 to 30 years old

No one ever reports that Zodiac is more than 30 years old

EXCEPT FOUKE AND ZELMS WHO CANNOT EVER PROVE THEY SAW THE REAL ZODIAC AND SAY HE IS 35-45?

So why does the Zodiac Community think this guy was older than 30? Why discount a younger suspect due to his age?

Onewhoknows, I personally think Z may very well have been in his 20’s (although I don’t personally think your suspect was Z)

Yes I believe there is plenty of evidence that Zodiac was younger than most folks think.
Also take into consideration that all the first victims would have been young and near his age.
Including Cheri Jo Bates, if you consider her a Zodiac victim.
Anyone besides Fouke and Zelms who report the killer as older?

I don’t understand how anybody can claim that Fouke and Zelms ‘did not see the real Zodiac’.

That being said, their age estimate is an outlier.

I don’t understand how anybody can claim that Fouke and Zelms ‘did not see the real Zodiac’.

That being said, their age estimate is an outlier.

I think, the sad truth is, Z was somewhere between his 20’s and 40’s,and thats an awful big span, which would fail to rule out a great deal of suspects. The initial sketch put Z at 25-35, and the ammended one at 35-45. The mystery guy sketch at Berryessa was described as 28-30,as well as the guy seen by Johns. Hartnell and Slate both described z as sounding in his 20’s,and "like a student". In short, we are all over the place here, a true mess.

Assuming we can rule out all non-white men, men under 18,and men over 50, we are still left with a very high % of the SF Bay population. For me personally, figure out which ones were in Riverside in 66-67,and that suspect pool will drop wayyyyy down to a very small amount of suspects

I think, the sad truth is, Z was somewhere between his 20’s and 40’s,and thats an awful big span, which would fail to rule out a great deal of suspects. The initial sketch put Z at 25-35, and the ammended one at 35-45. The mystery guy sketch at Berryessa was described as 28-30,as well as the guy seen by Johns. Hartnell and Slate both described z as sounding in his 20’s,and "like a student". In short, we are all over the place here, a true mess.

Assuming we can rule out all non-white men, men under 18,and men over 50, we are still left with a very high % of the SF Bay population. For me personally, figure out which ones were in Riverside in 66-67,and that suspect pool will drop wayyyyy down to a very small amount of suspects

I think 25 to 35 in 1969 is a very reasonable age range to work with.

The pool will drop even further if you can find someone with links to all three hotbeds of Zodiac activity – Riverside, Vallejo and SF. Bonus points if you can figure Lompoc into the equation.