Soorry, don’t see that..

QT:

Soorry, don’t see what???…you are as cryptic as the Belli cipher…

Can’t grasp the “Control Nineth” “Nine Controol” clue or is it something else???

DG.:

Well, I simply do think that Zodiac had written the letter just as a fluent text, with dyslectic errors in it. Also I do believe the 340 is, as the 408, a homophone cipher. What I (at least still) don’t see is any other graphical interpretation of the cipher – except the repetition of certain e.g. digraphs, trigraphs.

What is true is that Z had liked to use the word ‘Control’

12-20-69 – Melvin Belli (Happy Christmass)
07-19-78 – I am in control of all things
04-24-78 – Tell Herb Caen I am here

both letters written in very typical Z handwriting style..(although Mel’s letter was obviously written in extraordinary plain letters, presumably to hide his handwriting especially from Melvin).

So I see he had used such words, but actually don’t recognize them to be a ‘clue’. Just my opinion I wanted to let you know about..

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/seri … ter_9.html
http://zodiackillertruth.com/control.htm

QT

Hi Daniel,

Once again, I don’t know what to make of all this, but that string of vertically aligned O’s is particularly odd.

I would be surprised if it could be accounted for by statistical chance, so I would say it deserves some attention. And that leads me to be curious about the coincidental juxtaposition of the nine(th)/contro(o)l wording.

I never noticed them before, and I really don’t understand it, but those O’s do seem very Odd to me. Nice find.

G

Incidentally, I didn’t notice that you had highlighted that vertical string of O’s the first time I looked.

On my pad, I was only seeing the top half of your attached image of the Belli letter.

Itwdasn’t until I realized I could "scroll" the image to see the rest of it that I saw what you referring to.

Tks,

G

Hi Qt:

That’s a post I can understand thanks for that.

I agree with you on your comment about the 408 and 340 ciphers, no argument here about that. However, I don’t agree with you that the Zodiac was dyslectic. I didn’t highlight the 3rd control in the Belli letter towards the bottom of the page. I believe the Z intentionally misspelled words and did other things to cause confusion for investigators.

If you follow the flow of his letter he spells control the right way then spells it the wrong way followed by the string of 5 words in lined with 5 o’s. Then he nearly ends the letter with a correctly spelled “control”. That action alone is intentional to me.

You mentioned digraphs and trigraphs; its funny you mention that. I believe this kind of cipher has something to do with trigraphs using an EBCDIC code.

EBCDIC: Extended Binary Coded Decimal Interchange Code.

I believe the history behind EBCDIC is Berkeley College related from the early 50’s and 60’s… Kaczynski and Penn era. Penn has mentioned in his book about binary coding in regards to Z and his ciphers. I believe there could be some truths and some lies about his Morse Binary theory…etc

Hi G…

I couldn’t have said this better myself:

I would be surprised if it could be accounted for by statistical chance, so I would say it deserves some attention. And that leads me to be curious about the coincidental juxtaposition of the nine(th)/contro(o)l wording.

I believe the way Z wrote Nineth Control and Controol Nine is very intentional, it was written to draw attention to the 5 words with the in lined 5 o’s

I agree with you this definitely deserves a closer look; it could be Z ground breaking if my theory is correct.

Did I mention I have the solution…

Daniel

In fact it is a bit strange in which words Z had made his errors..Christmass, Controol..

…
Did I mention I have the solution…
…

Are you gonna be a TTTTTTTTTTTT, or are ya gonna share?

G

I see what you are showing… but which part is supposed to be the cipher?

The five or however many "o’s", or the words that contain them? When you put those words together that makes a fairly nonsensical phrase. Are you saying those words and not meant to be read as a phrase and that they are ciphertext? I’m just confused on which part is the cipher.

Daniel "drownding" is a word but it’s rather archaic. This link shows the word, its definition and further down the page gives examples of it in literature.

http://www.lexic.us/definition-of/drownding

Daniel-

I have to agree with Dave. I don’t see what value your posts add to this forum, and most of them (at least to me) don’t even make any sense.

You seem like a nice guy, so let me try to offer some advice. You just said:

Here is the solution to the Melvin Belli letter cipher:

NO
CONTROOL
BOMB
NOT
LONGER.

SOLUTION:

“ZODIAC LETTER WRITER NUMBER NINE”

How does that work? How did you get from A to B? Just as an example, I could perhaps present this:

cipher:
CABBAGE RUMPUS ARGYLE ZEUS YETI AND SAFFRON SMELL

solution:
LAVEY’S UNKNOWN NUMBERS ACTUALLY TERMINATE IN CIRCLES

Now, that’s just a silly example. It doesn’t make any sense, and I would never present something like that as a serious post. If you want to convince the readers
that you have something worth looking at, you have to make some sort of solid argument or presentation. You know, here is "A," follow these logical steps, and
it will lead you to "B."

But you don’t seem to do that. I consider myself a somewhat bright fellow, and I know that Dave Oranchak is, but I don’t think that we, or anyone else on this board
can make heads or tails of any of your posts, because they are just completely impossible to follow.

And what about Gareth Penn? You seem to bring him up quite a bit. Personally, I don’t believe that Penn has ANYTHING to do with the Zodiac case, other than trying
to insert himself into it, having sent many of his inane writings to the FBI, and his horrendous self-published "Times 17." Does anyone take Penn or his writings
seriously? I know that I do not. I think the man is truly mentally ill. I’ve actually tried to read through most of his stuff, but is is mostly incomprehensible.

And I don’t mean ‘incomprehensible’ to mean that I myself am incapable of understanding it, I mean that his nonsense is incomprehensible to ANYONE.

Daniel, is Gareth Penn someone you suspect to be responsible in the Zodiac case? If so, in what way? What point are you trying to present? Do you have a theory?

-glurk

Dave, you carry some weight in the Zodiac research world. Maybe you are bound to this strict zero percent rule… not happening by chance or coincidence but I’m not.

I have more then corroborating evidence here with this “Good Times” interview and the Belli Letter to break this case wide open. What you did was possibly hurt that evidence with your comments in my Z340 and “THE SACRED NINE” posting.

Your job is to demonstrate that these connections aren’t just random. That is not an arbitrary preference of mine. That is reality.

So far, everything you’ve asked me to analyze reduces to easily generated coincidences. You’ve filtered out the connections that don’t fit your existing ideas about the case, and kept the ones that do. That means you get to make up everything. That is not the way to "break the case wide open." It’s hard for me to hurt the evidence when it is not real to begin with.

HELLO…Gg9

All things in their own time.
Happy that your out of the basement are RU?
bE CAREFUL down there, It can get very dark.

Daniel, I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings with my comments. I just feel like I need to be truthful about your claims, which continue to fall apart when examined.

Dan I like you a lot and enjoy reading your work. Some of your work is very interesting, some I agree with, some of it I don’t agree with.

But it might help if you are careful in your claims. Say it is a "proposed solution". Or " I find something interesting". You tend to present even the first drafts of your work as "solving" it or "blowing the case open".

Also we have very strict rules about politeness and no personal attacks. But if you present work as solving these major unsolved codes, you have to expect legitimate questions and criticisms. You seem to take criticism personally which is unfortunate. I have mostly stopped commenting on your work as the last time I posted a criticism you seemed very hurt and lashed back at me. So, you lose the benefit of my ideas and criticism.

Glurk and doranchak have made valid criticisms and raised legit questions. Don’t take it personal. Prove them wrong, if you can, and forge ahead with your work in greater detail and clarity. Or better yet thoughtfully examine what they say and question if they could be right, and streamline and correct your work to make it better.

I personally spoke with a psychic who has historically worked on the Zodiac Killer case and she asked if my suspect was into Wicca. Not that I know of, but she
believes the Zodiac Killer was into Wicca. Wicca is the practice of Witchcraft.

…
Glurk and doranchak have made valid criticisms and raised legit questions. Don’t take it personal. Prove them wrong, if you can, and forge ahead with your work in greater detail and clarity. Or better yet thoughtfully examine what they say and question if they could be right, and streamline and correct your work to make it better.

Excellent advice, AKW.

Daniel, as I have mentioned privately, you have a knack for making observations that others overlook. I do not claim to understand your theories, but you have made at least 3 observations that have astounded me:

1) Your observation, in the Halloween Card, that the skeleton hand with 3 raised fingers and the number 14 relates to the value pi. It astonished me that I had completely overlooked that, and even more so that I had never heard anybody else suggest the same. (They may have done so, but if so, I missed it.) It should seem obvious to anybody who doesn’t buy into Penn’s theory (or it’s derivatives) that Z’s reference to radians would almost necessarily require a cryptic reference to pi.

2) Your observation that Z had, for some reason, caused 5 O’s to line up on the Belli letter. Although I have not fathomed to my own satisfaction Z’s reasons for having done this, it seems highly improbable that it was merely a coincidental lining up of letters. In any case, it would be imprudent to dismiss the matter as a coincidence without having given it serious attention. For my part, I have been mulling this over in my head for awhile now, trying to understand what it might signify. I suspect it will prove relevant, if we ever get answers to this damn mystery.

3) Your observation, in a PM to me, that my name, Gerhardt, is an anagram of Dr. Gareth. That was hilarious and caught me completely by surprise. I am most certainly not Gareth Penn, but even if I am not, the fact that you spotted that connection once again displayed your penchant for observing what others do not. It’s my name, and I never even noticed that.

I may not get your theories, but I very much do get the fact that you have a knack for looking at what everybody else has looked at thousands of times and seeing things that none of them even noticed. That may be a two-sided skill, but in my books, it is a skill worth having.

Best regards,

G