Respectfully, but everything you posted about Darlene Ferrin is dubious. Her stalker was identified right away in the first police report as George Waters and he had a rock solid alibi for the night of the murder, thus ruling out any involvement. Darlene didn’t know her killer, nor did Cecilia Shepard and this avenue of inquiry is at best, a distraction and, at worst, willfully delusional. Either way, these crimes remain unsolved and 50 years of this thinking has objectively led to absolutely nothing of substance.

Please, stop thinking "zebra" where horses are more likely to tread.

1. All the victims were killed at close range, David Faraday shot point blank, as was Paul Stine. Mageau and Ferrin through the window, Betty Lou inside of 10 feet, not 28 feet as many believe (one grain of gunpowder on her dress), and Hartnell and Shepard close quarters by knife.
2.Neither shot into the car at LHR was from distance, one bullet entered the bottom of the window and lodged in the rear wheel well, an angle too acute to be fired from any great distance. If the two cars were parked 3-10 feet apart, I doubt Zodiac walked away from the Rambler.
3.No connection between the crimes has to exist at all, that is why serial killers exist, there is no feasible motive, other than the fun of killing.
4. There is no evidence to support that any of the victims from the separate crimes knew each other.
5. The crimes have some things in common. All utilized the use of a gun. Couples were targeted in three of them. The killer got away every time. All crimes are different Dennis Rader targeted anybody from 9 to 62, strangled, suffocated and stabbed. That’s why it took 30 years to catch him.
6. If Zodiac was a babbling, drooling fruit and nutcase, what does this make the police. He was at least smart enough to evade their best efforts.

Respectfully, but everything you posted about Darlene Ferrin is dubious. Her stalker was identified right away in the first police report as George Waters and he had a rock solid alibi for the night of the murder, thus ruling out any involvement. Darlene didn’t know her killer, nor did Cecilia Shepard and this avenue of inquiry is at best, a distraction and, at worst, willfully delusional. Either way, these crimes remain unsolved and 50 years of this thinking has objectively led to absolutely nothing of substance.

Please, stop thinking "zebra" where horses are more likely to tread.

Darlene’s stalker was identified quickly, however, there is still the swirling rumors & mentions of an older stalker, with glasses, that was NOT George Waters,the Guy that supposedly would come into Darlene’s diner,and drove a white Chevy.

We don’t know whether Darlene knew her killer, since we don’t know the identity of her killer, it’s possible she did, although no direct evidence of such.

Darlene’s stalker was identified quickly, however, there is still the swirling rumors & mentions of an older stalker, with glasses, that was NOT George Waters,the Guy that supposedly would come into Darlene’s diner,and drove a white Chevy.

We don’t know whether Darlene knew her killer, since we don’t know the identity of her killer, it’s possible she did, although no direct evidence of such.

But those rumors came later, though, from interviews conducted with grief-stricken family members by Robert Graysmith, who was not allowed to make copies of police files or take notes while reviewing official documentation. Isn’t it more likely that Graysmith led Darlene’s sisters in their conversations and that they, memory being the faulty instrument it is, conflated vague recollections of George Waters with the Zodiac in order to imbue their beloved Darlene’s death with some meaning beyond whatever it signified to her killer?

1. All the victims were killed at close range, David Faraday shot point blank, as was Paul Stine. Mageau and Ferrin through the window, Betty Lou inside of 10 feet, not 28 feet as many believe (one grain of gunpowder on her dress), and Hartnell and Shepard close quarters by knife.
2.Neither shot into the car at LHR was from distance, one bullet entered the bottom of the window and lodged in the rear wheel well, an angle too acute to be fired from any great distance. If the two cars were parked 3-10 feet apart, I doubt Zodiac walked away from the Rambler.
3.No connection between the crimes has to exist at all, that is why serial killers exist, there is no feasible motive, other than the fun of killing.
4. There is no evidence to support that any of the victims from the separate crimes knew each other.
5. The crimes have some things in common. All utilized the use of a gun. Couples were targeted in three of them. The killer got away every time. All crimes are different Dennis Rader targeted anybody from 9 to 62, strangled, suffocated and stabbed. That’s why it took 30 years to catch him.
6. If Zodiac was a babbling, drooling fruit and nutcase, what does this make the police. He was at least smart enough to evade their best efforts.

@Pettibon Junction:
George Waters bothered Dee in her diners she worked at, but I doubt he’s the unidentified guy sitting in the car (it is said that Pam saw him on 8 different occasions). http://zodiackillerfacts.com/main/darle … the-story/). Please let me know which police report you mean? ("Her stalker was identified right away in the first police report as George Waters"). It’s good that we have this discussion..

@UKSpyCatcher:
ad1 – Some were shot from a few feet distance, others stabbed or shot really at close range. Although none was killed from a fair distance, the MO still appears to be quite different. Shooting into a car is different than shooting someone into his head. Why, for example, was David Faraday shot in his head and Mike Mageau shot from the passenger’s side? This somehow makes a difference. Did he want David to get out of the car? And if so, why? If Z had approached Faraday/Jensen in a similar way he did approach Mageau/Ferrin, then David wouldn’t even have had a chance to make it out of the car. Was he acting more secure now (using a different caliber, too?)?
ad2 – One shell was found from where actually a passenger’s door of any second car could have been..about 10 feet away (later walking towards the Rambler).
ad3/4 – I somehow doubt the pure killing spree theory. Lafferty mentioned in his book that Darlene had known Cecilia from singing in a choir. It is also said that Christine, Dee’s sister, had known Betty Lou Jensen. If that is true, then at least three victims were directly connected to each other. "Darlene introduced me to Cecilia" is what Linda DelBuono, Dee’s sister, had claimed when being interviewed on this issue (see below). Although this alone is no evidence, the witness Linda DelBuono not only clarifies that they had known each other but also described the way she had gotten this information (‘introduction’) and the occasions of where they had known from each other (‘Hogan High’ The Mouse play etc.).

It’s true that the crimes have things in common. But it is also true that many had been committed in a very different way. Even the victim’s bodies show these differences:

CJB: Slashed throat, short knife
MM/DF: Shot (inside car)
DF/BLJ: Shot in the head, back (outside car)
KJ: No immediate attack at all
CS/BH: Stabbed in the back, long knife, tied up
PS: Shot in the head (from inside of the car)

From this point of view, Paul Stine’s and David Faraday’s deaths had actually been the most comparable ones. Of course, the MO at LB was equal for both, CS & BH, too. But here are so many differences..stalking vs. non-stalking; immediate killing vs. waiting before or even without any attack; knife vs. gun (no gun known @ CJB); car manipulation vs. lover’s lanes; city action vs. rural areas; collecting shirts vs. writing on the car door..

Beyond that, there are indications that Stine had known Darlene Ferrin, too ( http://www.websleuths.com/forums/archiv … 80617.html). Souce…?

I just wonder why Z had been so ‘creative’ in doing his ‘thing’? Well, any thoughts are welcome.

"Police identified only one man said to have bothered Darlene. George was a frequent customer in the restaurant where Darlene worked and he apparently made unwanted advances toward her on several occasions. Investigators interviewed George and saw no reason to suspect that he had killed Darlene."

"According to Pam, Darlene warned that she had witnessed a murder and that the murderer had been following her. Pam suspected that Darlene may have been involved in a satanic cult. Both Pam and Linda claimed they had attended a painting party in Darlene’s home, and that they had seen an unidentified man who arrived wearing a suit. Darlene was reportedly afraid of this man and warned Pam to stay away from him because, “She said he was a bad man… She’d seen him kill somebody.” Soon, others said that they had been at the party, too, including Vallejo police officer Steve Baldino, who also claimed that he had heard a recording of the Zodiac’s phone to call police on the night Darlene was killed."

http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=675

QT

Something written isn’t necessarily a fact.

Prove to me that Kathleen Johns and Cheri Jo Bates were victims of the Zodiac. You can’t. There is no proof that they were. I don’t think they were. He took full credit for his victims and proved he killed them. He got his emotional satisfaction not from the murders themselves, which were relatively few and relatively non-sadistic, for a serial killer, but from terrorizing the whole community with his manipulation of the press and police. If you eliminate Bates and Johns, then there is not much irregularity—three lovers’ lane couples, then the one big city murder to get the Chronicle and the whole city a little bit terrified.

Prove to me that Kathleen Johns and Cheri Jo Bates were victims of the Zodiac. You can’t. There is no proof that they were. I don’t think they were. He took full credit for his victims and proved he killed them. He got his emotional satisfaction not from the murders themselves, which were relatively few and relatively non-sadistic, for a serial killer, but from terrorizing the whole community with his manipulation of the press and police. If you eliminate Bates and Johns, then there is not much irregularity—three lovers’ lane couples, then the one big city murder to get the Chronicle and the whole city a little bit terrified.

In a letter

http://www.zodiacciphers.com/uploads/4/ … 95.png?495

Z refers to his Riverside activity after the idea of connecting him to this area was published in the media. The envelope had double postage, with ‘Calif’ written on it. The handwriting shows multiple congruencies such as the looped + symbol, the curvy ‘f’, the ‘bird’-like ‘r’ letter, the open ‘g’, the right-oriented handwriting such as with ‘d’, the large ‘I’ with two horizontal bars etc…also the letter is referring to ‘blue meannies’ and ‘crackproof’. It was sent less than four months after the SF Chronicle had received a Zodiac call (Graysmith, p.96). Ten days later, the peek through the pines card had followed. I’d be not that sure that anybody else had known about Z’S double postage ‘style’ from the media? So if he refers to Riverside, which crime would he mean if not CJB?

Kathleen Johns..he’s referring to her as well: On 07/24/1970 the ‘Button’ letter was sent, envelope same ‘Calif’ style and very typical handwriting. He gave a woman + her child an ‘interesting ride’ a few months back. He mentions that he had put her car on fire (not sure if that was in the media at all until then?), apparently taking credit for the crime. In addition to that, Kathleen Johns immediately recognizes her abductor on the police sketch.

Of course you can say ‘Kathleen Johns is a liar and both letters are fake’, but then there is no serial killer at all. Mageau said he is dark blond, Hartnell said he is brown haired with curly hair. Fouke saw a crew-cut guy. Others mentioned a pompadour hairstyle. And yes, he wore glasses. But not in BRS. Well.

QT

QT—nothing about what Zodiac wrote in regards to KJ wasn’t in the paper. Take a look again at the link you provided:

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/topic/6 … pXSTbYrL6o

I’m not saying he didn’t write the letter. Yes, he liked to mess with the press and police—he was not always truthful. The four confirmed attacks were proven by him. He said things only the killer would know. At least, that’s my understanding—I don’t have an encyclopedic knowledge of all his letters, attacks, phone calls, etc. As you yourself point out, the Johns and CJB incidents were irregular compared to his confirmed attacks.

Of course you can say ‘Kathleen Johns is a liar and both letters are fake’, but then there is no serial killer at all. Mageau said he is dark blond, Hartnell said he is brown haired with curly hair. Fouke saw a crew-cut guy. Others mentioned a pompadour hairstyle. And yes, he wore glasses. But not in BRS. Well.QT

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously fallible and if you look at composite drawings generated in response to witness descriptions in virtually any serial killer case, you’ll find at least one or two that are radically different from what the suspect actually looked like after he was caught. A prime example of this is the Son of Sam, who seemingly shape-shifted from one eyewitness account to the next – a detail many still use to gin up farfetched stories of accomplices and cult involvement. (Sound familiar?) Similarly, black serial killers Derrick Todd Lee and John Allen Muhammad were originally described to police as white men, with faulty composite drawings being generated in each case before the eventual suspects were identified and later convicted using airtight forensic evidence.

The straw-man argument that Zodiac witnesses described such disparate perpetrators as to disprove the classification of these crimes as serial murder is, frankly, ridiculous. There are far more similarities than differences.

Of course you can say ‘Kathleen Johns is a liar and both letters are fake’, but then there is no serial killer at all. Mageau said he is dark blond, Hartnell said he is brown haired with curly hair. Fouke saw a crew-cut guy. Others mentioned a pompadour hairstyle. And yes, he wore glasses. But not in BRS. Well.QT

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously fallible and if you look at composite drawings generated in response to witness descriptions in virtually any serial killer case, you’ll find at least one or two that are radically different from what the suspect actually looked like after he was caught. A prime example of this is the Son of Sam, who seemingly shape-shifted from one eyewitness account to the next – a detail many still use to gin up farfetched stories of accomplices and cult involvement. (Sound familiar?) Similarly, black serial killers Derrick Todd Lee and John Allen Muhammad were originally described to police as white men, with faulty composite drawings being generated in each case before the eventual suspects were identified and later convicted using airtight forensic evidence.

The straw-man argument that Zodiac witnesses described such disparate perpetrators as to disprove the classification of these crimes as serial murder is, frankly, ridiculous. There are far more similarities than differences.

True, but he did mention the woman+baby incident a few months earlier. Don’t know if there has been another similar incident? He could have known about it from the news..but could he know about the car being put on fire, too? This, in combination with Kathleen John’s reaction, makes me personally believe that she had a ride with Z. Same with his mentioning of Riverside, he takes credit on that one and even pays the ‘blue meannies’ some respect. Anyway, what do you think are the similarities? Like hard facts, someone could pin him on a certain MO? Lover’s lanes, ok, but even that is not valid for all of his victims. Then there is the committing crimes on the weekend, nothing special either. I’m just curious if there are any other similarities..or why there are simply no such similarities at all. All of his victims have been white. Zebra killings, for example, in the first wave only once a machete was used but all other victims had been shoot with 2-4 shots. Something like that, imo, is missing with Z.

QT

True, but he did mention the woman+baby incident a few months earlier. Don’t know if there has been another similar incident? He could have known about it from the news..but could he know about the car being put on fire, too? This, in combination with Kathleen John’s reaction, makes me personally believe that she had a ride with Z. Same with his mentioning of Riverside, he takes credit on that one and even pays the ‘blue meannies’ some respect. Anyway, what do you think are the similarities? Like hard facts, someone could pin him on a certain MO? Lover’s lanes, ok, but even that is not valid for all of his victims. Then there is the committing crimes on the weekend, nothing special either. I’m just curious if there are any other similarities..or why there are simply no such similarities at all. All of his victims have been white. Zebra killings, for example, in the first wave only once a machete was used but all other victims had been shoot with 2-4 shots. Something like that, imo, is missing with Z.

QT

QT, I was mostly referring to the notion (which isn’t yours, really) that since witnesses described slightly different-looking guys at the crime scenes, then there must have either been a conspiracy of sorts or the murders were not all related.

As far as the crimes go, the canonical four are linked by signature. Signature is an intangible thing and often difficult to pin down but it’s defined by Robert Keppel in his work ‘Signature Killers’ (which, by the way, sells for cheap in paperback and belongs in any amateur sleuth’s library) as what a killer does that has nothing to do with the commission of the crime but is key to his enjoyment of it. Essentially, it boils down to asking what a murderer "gets" out of killing and then finding the answer in the scenes.

In the Zodiac case, the obvious answer would be the phone calls and letters, the taunting of authority but that’s only one component of it. I’ve said this before the Zodiac’s primary motive is CONQUEST. It’s not enough for him to be a Joel Rifkin or a Bill Suff, picking up "easy" victims from the local flesh markets and having his way with them. He starts off going for YOUNG COUPLES. There is no sexual assault or prolonged physical contact with the victims. The murders themselves are perfunctory and performed execution style but they punctuate the point he’s trying to make. People often assume the bulk of Z’s contempt is for the female victims but I don’t necessarily believe that. My gut instinct is that despite being an absolute failure with women, the bulk of Zodiac’s early traumas in life were meted out by males and so, having men there at the scenes of these crimes is incredibly important to him. In slaying a male, he takes his place, thus "winning" possession of a young, vivacious, attractive woman, the likes of which he’s probably always felt entitled to but shut out from by perceived gatekeepers, but he’s also neutralizing a threat he’s suffered under his whole life. That’s not insignificant and, I would argue, speaks to signature.

Ultimately, Zodiac has to escalate his activities and broaden the scope of what, exactly, he deserves. His wishlist is growing and he deviates from his pattern to hit an "easy" victim. The murder of Paul Stine was a shot across the bow and tipped Z’s hand to reveal a grander design. It’s also in keeping with the risk-taking pattern of behavior evidenced by his earlier crimes and the danger of sauntering away from the crime scene after being seen by numerous witnesses may have dampened the thrill even for him. But no matter. At this point, the letter writing campaign ramps up to fever proportions and the more esoteric and bizarre the communications become.

They also tell us exactly what his motive was: not fantasies of sadism, as many interpreted his "slaves in paradice" communique to mean, but those of conquest, of punishment, of the righteous despotism of a man who would be king. There are solid arguments in favor of the Bates’ murder being the work of either Z or a guy very much like him (the "Confession" letter being especially damning) and so I remain necessarily agnostic there, but I’m having a difficult seeing Kathleen Johns falling victim to the Zodiac, mostly because I have a hard time getting a straight answer as to what the hell actually happened to her given how radically her story changed with each telling.

All this is probably a bit off-topic and redundant but I hope it helps.

He could have known about it from the news..but could he know about the car being put on fire, too?
QT

QT–You need to read the article in the link. He knew.

Thought you knew this stuff.

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/topic/6 … paj0PkrK71