Thanks Ak and again will say this is the best Zodiac board out there. Thanks to you and Morf and others making it happen! Ps. I’m not suggesting either of the Hardens are killers but worth further looking into after Bettye’s statements in the book. Anyhow have a great night and weekend!

I agree with Akwilks, that is my feeling as well.

I’m not saying that anyone should be off limits, in terms of finding out useful information. Maybe Bettye does know info we don’t, and I’m sure even if she didn’t, just her knowledge of what her and her husband did for the codes would be worth hearing about. But I think that is different than implying that she could be the killer or involved in crimes.

I was just kidding about "put out your name and be accused". That was just to illustrate that no one wants their name publicly associated with "murder suspect". I think that is a big deal that should be based on something more than just "why not?"

Some of the ideas that have been used to justify suspicion of Don Harden was the idea that the "FBI couldn’t solve the 408" and that he was the only one who did, so he must have created it. As we’ve seen that is BS. The suspicion of Bettye is based on a cryptic message that she allegedly wrote.

To me that does not seem like a substantial reason to consider them worth investigating as possible suspects.

Some of the ideas that have been used to justify suspicion of Don Harden was the idea that the "FBI couldn’t solve the 408" and that he was the only one who did, so he must have created it. As we’ve seen that is BS. The suspicion of Bettye is based on a cryptic message that she allegedly wrote.

To me that does not seem like a substantial reason to consider them worth investigating as possible suspects.

I agree – very much so. I don’t know if it has been proven that the cryptic message was even written by Bettye Harden – but even if it was, she was (as several have mentioned here) a woman who struggled with mental problems. Perhaps she was obsessed with solving the 340, perhaps she thought she HAD solved it or was close to doing it, who knows. I agree with AK: If this is indeed written by Bettye Harden the most obvious explanation is that it refers to 1) the fact that she solved the 408, thus in a sense “creating” the Z case and 2) the fact she was convinced (or at least wanted to give that impression) that she would solve the 340 as well, thus ending the case (assuming Z revealed who he was in the 340, which she may have done). *

It doesn’t have to be more complicated than that. I don’t see anything sinister in the Hardens’ involvement at all. It’s a good thing to keep an open mind about the case, explore all sorts of angles based on the available facts – but at the same time it’s easy to become overly suspicious and conjure up all sorts of ghosts. Many people were involved in the Z case, some of them more heavily than others, and on some the case no doubt had a huge impact – it’s nothing suspicious about that in itself.

* I don’t think the 340 contains anything of the sort myself, but she may have believed it did.

Maybe it’s possible that the Hardens found something more in the 408 that was not published. (Like a name or initials). Perhaps LE didn’t permit disclosure of the finding, or ….(formulate your own reason for nondisclosure).

Hello all – Very interested in the Hardens as suspects in the Zodiac case, as much as it is preposterous to some. Can I start a Donald Gene Harden/Bettye June Harden post in the possible suspects section without a problem? I have looked and and looked into many aspects of Donald and Bettye Hardens involvement and there is a huge amount of ‘coincidence’ type evidence which really has me intrigued if not convinced Donald Gene Harden was Z. All I ask is for you to evaluate what I put forward and comment, TBH I would love to be proven wrong almost just as much as I would like to be proven right.

no offense, but i don’t think you’re establishing a way you could be proven wrong other than the crimes being solved and it not being the hardens. coincidences are just that – coincidental. the only power they have is the meaning we give them. you appear to be giving meaning to things like anagrams in messages. i could find anagrams for "defuser killed them" in the 408 but what does that mean? nothing really, but there’s no way to prove it doesn’t mean anything. i say all this to be constructive because i can see the rabbit hole that a person can go down when coincidence meets coincidence times ten. just my 2 cents.

Defuser351 welcome to the board. Please read the board rules here: http://www.zodiackillersite.com/viewtop … =22&t=2195

I see you have started a thread about Don Harden as a suspect here: http://www.zodiackillersite.com/viewtop … =47&t=2253

That is fine. There have been a few members here interested in Don and/or Bettye Harden so they can view what you have to offer there. Many others will be very skeptical so expect some constructive criticism as well. It really all depends on the quality of your evidence. I have not seen one bit of evidence to suggest Don and/or Bettye Harden could be the Zodiac. I think they are heroes, ordinary citizens who used their intelligence, creativity and hard work to solve the first Zodiac code. Donald was a respected teacher and led an impeccable life with no hint of being a minor criminal let alone a serial killer. Bettye suffered from some mental health issues but led a good life with no criminal behavior at all and was loved by her family. But this board is open to all ideas and theories, as long as they are within the libel and other laws, server/host regulations and board rules. So you can pursue your idea at the thread you established.

One of our important board rules is no cross posting. That means if you have an idea for a topic first use the search function to see if it already exists. If it does not go ahead and start ONE and ONLY ONE thread on your new idea, theory or suspect. Do NOT post that same material in already existing threads. Make sure any posts you make are directly relevant to the section and thread you post in.

We stress politeness and civility here. No personal attacks allowed. We do have tough but constructive criticism and polite debate about theories and ideas.

Now that you have created a Harden topic thread, put all your posts about the Hardens in that one thread. Posting on that same topic in other threads is a violation of the cross posting rule and will result in suspension or a permanent ban. This thread was about rumors about the Hardens and the codes. It is not about your theory. You have one thread for that so put all of your ideas there. If you have other ideas about finding the Harden name in other codes put them in your existing Harden thread. Since you are new this will serve as a first (and last)friendly warning. Another violation will result in suspension or a ban. This board is a great resource with a lot of members skilled in different areas like codes, factual research, handwriting, digging up info on people, etc. Just carefully read and follow the rules and you will no doubt enjoy posting here and benefit from constructive criticism, helpful suggestions and a lot of posted research.

Also what you posted is not code work. Since every letter in the alphabet is in the 408 solved, and you go omnidirectional with wide anagrams, using that method, almost any name can be arrived at. Using that method you could very likely find Richard, Ted, Allen, Mickey and hundreds of other names. You can post that type of thing in your Harden thread, if you wish, but it does NOT belong in this section which is about working to break the Zodiac codes. To be frank, it has absolutely no value as evidence as it can produce any name you look for. If the name DONALD was there, vertical or diagonal, correct spelling, no anagrams, that may still be chance but is a little different and slightly more interesting. But that is not what you have shown. Masootz was right in his comments.

Anyway welcome to the board. I hope you read and follow the rules and enjoy your time here. I am one of the mods here, if you have a question send me a private message.

Welcome Defusier,
Lots of interesting twists & turns to the Z case. Look forward to your thoughts & research. There’s a thread for a lot of the topic’s, a good place to start is the search engine for our forum, we all use it.
Sincerely, Zam*

but there’s no way to prove it doesn’t mean anything. i say all this to be constructive because i can see the rabbit hole that a person can go down when coincidence meets coincidence times ten. just my 2 cents.

This times a thousand.

Even Hermione from the Harry Potter books understands this. Books about magic, no less:

"All right," said Hermione, disconcerted. "Say the Cloak existed. . . what about that stone, Mr. Lovegood? The thing you call the Resurrection Stone?"

"What of it?"

"Well, how can that be real?"

"Prove that it is not," said Xenophilius.

Hermione looked outraged.

"But that’s – I’m sorry, but that’s completely ridiculous! How can I possibly prove it doesn’t exist? Do you expect me to get hold of – of all the pebbles in the world and test them? I mean, you could claim that anything’s real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody’s proved it doesn’t exist!"

I would agree. Just to let people know defuser started a thread on his theories about coincidences and anagrams about the Hardens as Zodiac here: viewtopic.php?f=47&t=2253

Because of our rules on no cross posting I asked him to put all his ideas in that thread and he has complied. So if you want to see all of his work it is there and if anyone has questions, comments, constructive criticism, supportive evidence or helpful suggestions please post them there. We had several good discussions there. I enjoyed discussing these issues with defuser and others, but I felt I made my points, tried to answer his questions and now leave that thread to those who are more interested (and several people are). Defuser seems very open to polite constructive criticism, though I don’t think myself, up2, norse or others have yet swayed his view.

But anyway for those who are interested you can see all of his work there and contribute to the discussion if you wish.

There you go – I’ve always said that Emma Watson was the smart one. The other one, whatever his name is, has moved on to starring in a deplorable remake of "The Woman In Black" and beyond that I don’t know what he’s done. Emma Watson, on the other hand, delivered a pretty decent speech on some theme or other which I was made aware of the other day. Can’t remember the details, but it was politically correct – and allround pretty good.

Anyway, yeah, Hermione’s on the money. You can’t prove a negative. Or – well, you can actually. But the point still stands. The onus, as they say, is on the proponent. And that – as they also say – is that.