Wow…so young! I have never seen Toschi like this before. Wonder who Mr. Willy (sp) was at the end.

I wasn’t sure if Armstrong said Willy or Woolly!!

It was not until April 24, 1978 that Zodiac had directly addressed to Toschi in his (first) Herb Caen letter. Handwriting appears authentic to me and has Toschi been cleared of faking this particular letter ( http://www.zodiacciphers.com/the-1978-letter.html ).

Assuming it to be authentic for a second, it raises the question why Z had addressed Toschi. IMO there might be only two reasons for that:

– Toschi had successfully investigated Z in his ‘real life’, thus Z nearly got busted and he coped with it by mentioning Toschi in his next letter (as another ‘hint’)
"He will get tired, then leave me alone" (Z implying that Toschi had not only once investigated him in his real life)

– Z had spoken in general about Toschi giving up his case, however he referred to ‘Tales of the City’ where Toschi was present as an investigator but Z felt that he’d be ‘better’

QT

I think Mr Willy was just someone proposing a theory to decrypting one of the codes, and Armstong was manning the tip line?

Also I don’t think the Herb Caen letters are legit. I think they’re copying Zodiac to the best of their knowledge, maybe just to keep the case alive. Not saying it’s Toschi who wrote them,
But they left out some other things I can’t disclose yet.

They found DNA on that letter. It’s still considered a hoax. Soooo…they probably know more than they’re telling.

Good point Coffee Time.

I’m not sure why it came up on this particular thread, but there’s some wacky stories about the Caen letter in the Lafferty book. Alan Keel (SFPD lab chief) allegedly told LL and his partner that:

A) Toschi was cleared by DNA, and that Toschi…
B) …"actually admitted" to writing it (!).

Did Keel let something slip there? He initially stated that Toschi refused to provide a sample, then mysteriously "remembered" that they had already obtained one from old files.

When asked, three different times, if DNA from the ’74 and ’78 letters matched, Keel answered:

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes

(Reworded my post, since I had misremembered part of the book. LL did not ask about the Exorcist letter specifically.)

Hi-

Yes, Keel was very frustrating to talk to. I spoke to him in February 2007 just before the movie came out and he told me the exact same thing about forgeries. He said that the SFPD lab separates the letters into two groups, the "true" Z letters that are characterized by not having been licked and two "forgeries" that were licked by the forger. DNA that is easily extracted from the two forgeries matches between the two. He said that one of the forgeries was the 1978 letter and that one was one of the 1974 letters but he "could not recall" which one. I think that is a load of bull. If I had discovered that one of the letters was a forgery, I certainly would not "forget" which one. I think it is a hold back.

In 2000, Tom V. got his hands on a DNA summary sheet that was prepared in the Keel era. RG reproduced it in his second book. The only 1974 letter that had been analyzed for DNA by the time that chart was compiled (i.e., while Keel was at SFPD was the Exorcist letter. That is why I, too, believe that it is the 1974 forgery.

IIRC, after that initial conversation Keel never responded to any of my questions again.

My own belief is that SFPD did obtain Toschi’;s DNA and they know if he is the forger or not. However, given how political I know the department to be, if he was the forger they are not copping to it because of how embarrassing it would be to them. Even if DT had refused to provide a sample, we all know how easy it would have been to grab his Coke can or fork at a restaurant and have it analyzed. So they know and Keel’s coyness about that whole thing suggests that they do know but are not saying. IMHO only.

Mike

I personally think there is Zero % chance that the Exorcist letter is a fake. I think the Badlands letter is real. To me, it leaves the SLA letter as a possible fake,not that I personally think it’s a fake,but of the 3,I would think that one before the others. What if it is not a ‘fake’, but simply mistaken as a Zodiac letter? It doesn’t say Zodiac anyplace on there, makes no threats, somebody screening the mail just put it aside as a Z letter. Again, I personally don’t think any of them are fakes,just sayin

Hi-

Well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion but someone who actually touched and worked with the letters and did DNA analysis of them has said twice to two different people at different times that the truth is that one 1974 letter is a forgery and he is in a position to know, right? And BTW, Keel works in a highly respected DNA lab and has since he left SFPD, so he is not some hack.

I believe that if you are going to say that you *believe* that all of the 1974 letters may be legit (i.e., disputing Keel’s findings), you should explain why that is so. Are you saying that you are questioning whether or not Keel was competent to successfully isolate DNA from two of the letters and to then match the DNA between those two letters, or are you saying that you believe the 1978 letter is legit, so the DNA from the 1974 and 1978 letters definitely comes from the letter writer/Z?

Keel seemed pretty professional to me when I spoke to him and said that the real Z letters were not licked. Are you disputing the fact that there are letters that were licked and those that were not licked based on amylase analyses of the letters?

Mike

How did the news papers decide which ones were real and to publish them, and which ones were fakes and to discard them? Iv always struggled with this, how do we know any of the letters are real except for the ones with the shirt and the ones that provide details from the killer?

I presume hundreds of fakes were sent in to the chronicle over the years, who decided which were real and which were not?

I think maybe we underestimate how good forgers can be.

Theres even a possibility some legit letters from the Zodiac were tossed away because someone doubted their validity.

…
I think maybe we underestimate how good forgers can be…

Not I!

Seriously though. That is a good point and one of the reasons I began taking a very different stance when it comes to the letters and cards…I looked at them in a much different light. And while I think the Exorcist letter looks damn good, it wouldn’t surprise me if it wasn’t real.

Has anyone here ever tried to pen their own zodiac letter? It would be an interesting experiment to see how convincing some members could make their Z letters look. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the results were alarming.

If it could be done it would really put things in perspective.

I could be wrong but I believe somebody with a knowledge of Z’s letters, an interest in the case and the desire could make a forgery could make something very impressive.

We live in a world where classic works of art have been forged without notice. A convincing forgery of a letter wouldn’t be too hard to pull off IMHO.

A person who was a member here, pulled it off pretty good. Had a few here convinced.