Hi Barry S.–I was not painting all people with autism with the same brush as I picture/imagine z. I did not intend to offend anyone and I’m sorry if I did. I agree with Norse’s post –there are many forms and degrees of autism and everyone is an individual. My personal opinion is that anyone who murders a stranger–like z did–has some form of mental illness. And I don’t think a psychotic could carry it out. Kids and grown-ups can be cruel, and I imagine z was considered an awkward/weird kid. I think he had above average intelligence in some areas–codes, language–but couldn’t make it work socially.

I had never really thought about how he wore his hooded costume at Lake Berryessa but never alluded to it. That is strange. I also think his choice of pants –pleated, "old-fashioned" –is strange. It was the late 60’s–most young people wore bell-bottoms or jenes. He just seems so off in a way–not crazed, but distant. Lake Herman Rd was a "hit" –with all the comings and goings he had to have done that w/i 10 minutes tops. From what Mike M. reported, Blue Ridge Springs was a "hit" as well–didn’t say a word to them. Lake Berryessa is different of course–but he’s still remote/distant (the costume.) I ‘m not sure of what I think about Presidio Heights. Again, this is just my opinion.

Don’t worry, I’m not offended; I rarely get offended at anything; and frankly, it’s usually me doing the offending. I just think there are a lot of misconceptions about autism out there in the ether. While I don’t find much of Z’s behavior autistic in nature, I will concede that he had a few obsessions.

I think (as Trav so nicely points out above) that Berkowitz obviously mimicked Zodiac. "I love to hunt"…"fair game", etc., etc. Just like Zodiac most certainly got tidbits from the Jack-the-Ripper letters.

Seems very likely, yes.

In general, it’s problematic to "diagnose" anyone based on their writing alone.

As far as the latter goes, however, I’d say that B is much more detailed, personal and explicit than Z. B provides reasons for his actions (crazy reasons, but reasons nonetheless, which can be – so to speak – readily understood). Why does Z kill, according to his statements?

He’s collecting slaves (no details offered).
He thinks it’s fun (no details offered).

Agreed. This is what keeps nagging me! No details offered by Z other than some off the wall shit that I don’t understand (much like his other crap that no one can figure out still). I agree with Tahoe that both killers were trying to be greater in creating their personas and were likely anything but – probably either didn’t fit in and were losers. Many people want to buy into the narrative the killer presented, but that narrative is part of the killer’s fantasy – what they see themselves as and wish to be (NOT who they really are which is nothing extraordinary).

Look at Elliot Rogers who wrote his manifesto before shooting the kids in SB last year. He thought he was so great and didn’t understand why people didn’t like him (or so he claimed)…Making himself out to be greater and more worthy of attention. Meanwhile everyone else who knows him says he was undeserving of positive attention from anyone as he was abusive and creepy – a real loser!!!! But nooo…. In his manifesto his narrative says he was deserving. That he was great looking and women should swoon over him. Blah blah blah. Complete psychopathic narcissists who want to play God and suit their narrative to fit their deeds, whether the narrative is credible or not. They always try to give a reason – it’s how they get attention by Providing us the "why" to satiate us, but Zodiac didn’t tell us a concrete why. Just that he thought it was fun and he was collecting slaves for his "paradice". Why no concrete reasons? There was for CJB bc he says she brushed him off (rejection as a motivation much like Elliot Rogers), but why the others after? Even with CJB he made a reference to her going to the slaughter like a lamb… Which kind of still seems to play into his feelings that she is a sacrifice of sorts. A sacrifice to what? To also become his slave in paradice? A sacrifice to Himself, because in his mind he is worthy even if everyone else wouldn’t realize it.

I came across a video online about zodiac that had inserted a scene from "Silence of the Lambs" where Hannibal is saying to Clarice–What does he do, Clarice? Think! ( this is obviously not verbatim ) and the final answer was "he covets." When I first saw the movie I remember thinking–really? He kidnaps, kills, skins etc. where is covets? But as I thought of it over time I thought it was a rather ingenious observation–kind of the core driver for that character. I have tried to apply that question to z for my musings and–even though I’m not totally
satisfied with my "answer" its something along the line of–he taunts. He terrorizes too, but that seems to go along with the taunting. He didn’t taunt his victims that we have witnesses from tho. Mike Mageau describes a wordless "hit" and –oddly enough–from what Bryan Hartnell reported, there was no taunting, verbal torture, etc. Z wanted to lord it over the police, and to a lesser extent, the public at large. The victims seem secondary to his primary purpose of being recognized, published, acknowledged. Maybe instead of " he taunts" the answer to what does he do is –he publishes. Not sure–that’s why I’m not satisfied I’m always interested in other people’s views on z.

I would say that Z ‘boasts’ or ‘brags’.He wanted attention, he wanted to feel important, he wanted to matter. He didn’t want to be invisible, that’s my take

@morf13 He clearly did not.  He later admitted that in prison interviews.  Berkowitz later changed his story to say that he was part of a group of satanist thrill killers.  I’m not sure I believe that, but I definitely don’t believe that he believed that he was talking to a demon through his neighbor’s dog.  He probably was sleep deprived and on drugs.  So, any psychosis was chemically induced.  I think he was likely sane.  

I also don’t buy that Zodiac believed in slaves in the afterlife.

Lucid maybe, but his actions and behaviour are bizarre and eccentric. It’s not usual for schizophrenic people to recant delusions, happens all the time, psychosis isn’t a light switch, there are all kinds of shades and flavours.

Having said that I don’t think full blown paranoid schizophrenia is likely. I would suggest anti social personality disorder with schizotypal and borderline features. I think the sort of prodromal psychosis that is often described by people with personality disorders enables them to be far better at faking full blown psychosis, a kind of exaggeration of something that is to a lesser degree present.

I read a great article by a journalist who went through this exact experience with psychopath he interviewed who claimed he was faking it, but the “faking” it was kind of just another layer of the insanity. I’ll see if I can find it.