Thomas Horan’s Zodiac hoax theory is the true crime equivalent of Artemis’ closing argument in the "Who Pooped the Bed?" episode of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

Or this "cracking the case" scene from Black Dynamite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PSueHOY-Jk

They even use zodiac signs to justify their conclusions.

It’s a fairly typical trait in proponents of conspiracy theories, I suppose: They do tend to – when the theory has reached a point of no return – to simply forget that it’s supposed to be somewhat coherent and comprehensive.

If the thing began with Berryessa or Stine – alright. Sort of. Not really, actually, but let’s be generous. But it didn’t begin with Berryessa – according to the very same theory, which has now reached the point where the theorist begins to stumble about in all the elaborateness and paranoia he has built up.

With regard to the Land hypothesis, we have to at best, or most, presuppose that the real hoaxers (Snook and his cronies, or whoever) somehow managed to either convince or lure the genuinely homicidal/pathological Land into using their own Zodiac creation as an “inspiration” for his genuinely disturbed/repressed/plain fed up attack on two college kids.

Because the alternative is so inconceivable that I don’t think even Horan would propose it: It was pure happenstance. A park ranger who was the brother of a deputy Snook may or may not have known personally (Narlow certainly knew him, at any rate) just happened to be a complete nutcase (very likely the SRH murderer, no less), and just happened to come up with the idea of copycatting a “serial killer” who was, in fact, just a construct on the part of the hoaxers. And who wasn’t particularly famous at the time either, one might add.

But theorists of this ilk don’t recognize such blatant inconsistencies, they just keep adding more unfounded bu*it to the pile, treating isolated incidents as hugely telling while ignoring that their own finds undermine the theory they’re supposed to be selling.

One trait I encountered with Horan is that when you present information that directly contradicts something in this theory, he will take ownership of the new fact and incorporate it into the theory somehow, while thanking you for helping to bolster his claims. It’s a rather sly technique of self-delusion!

@danmyers22 Yes.  He says that it was a copycat who had access to the symbol from the newspapers.  He thinks Dennis Land was likely the LB killer.  So, according to him, Land committed the stabbings, left, and then came back in uniform after cleaning up to find Harntell on the Knoxville Road.  He takes particular note of Hartnell’s statement that when he saw Land, he thought the killer had returned, insinuating that Hartnell recognized Land’s mannerisms and/or voice.