OK PJ, you don’t think Kaczinsky was the Zodiac. You’re entitled to your (false) opinion. Still, my point was you can’t really psychoanalyze the Zodiac from his letters, which might be nothing but false clues (combined with enough evidence to prove the letter writer perpetrated his four attacks). Then I used the example of Kaczinsky creating a false persona in his Unabomber letters. Successfully. Admitted by the FBI. Or maybe you don’t believe Kaczinsky was the Unabomber, either. You’re certainly entitled to your opinion.

If anyone knew facts for facts, we’d know who Zodiac was. PJ’s opinion is just that–an opinion. As is any discussion of Ted K. or any other POI.

Some of us think we do know who the Zodiac was. But I think my criticism of PJ was legitimate in regard to trying to psychoanalyze the Z from his letters. It’s possible he was pouring out his soul, but more likely he was trying to mislead and mess with the cops and reporters as much as possible. And keep from getting caught—-at which he was successful—-until his little brother ratted him out as the Unabomber and they locked him up and threw away the key.

"Think" is the key word.

As long as it is written as opinion, most will be ok with anyone’s ideas of a POI. It’s when those ideas end up in almost every thread and written as if they are factual statements that people become frustrated and annoyed. There are many topics in the Ted K. thread where you can discuss him more thoroughly.

There’s a lot of people at Quantico who would take umbrage at the idea that you can’t learn anything about an unidentified offender’s background and personality through a careful analysis of crime scene/post-offense behaviors.

PJ, you said "as for motive, he told us everything we need to know in letters." That’s what I was disputing. Now all of a sudden you’re talking about crime scene and post offense behavior. That’s something different. Yes, of course you can analyze the letters and learn something but you had a complete psychoanalysis laid out, complete with a description of his mother. He could have been intentionally creating a false persona, as Kaczinsky did with his Unabomber letters. (I think the Z WAS Kaczinsky; you don’t. That’s OK.) But whoever the Z was he put all kinds of false clues in his letters. You can’t just assume he was pouring out his soul for somebody like you to psychoanalyze him.

If I may post my two cents (which is about what is is worth): modus operandi can change over time. Criminals evolve, they see what works, what doesn’t and they can refine their techniques. Health changes, criminals get old, their environment changes. BTK originally targeted young single women (with the exception of the Otero family), but his victimology changed as he got older. He started killing older women because they were easier to subdue as he aged. Not surprisingly he had plans to kill a child when he was captured. Another weak victim. Rader stopped killing for a while because he had a family. Some speculate this was the case was EAR/ONS too.

With Zodiac, he evolved over time. The murder of CJB (his first, I believe) where she fought hard for her life and his knife was inadequate for the job. So he tries to avoid that in the next few killings by using a gun. Until LB when he feels confident enough to use a knife again, although he made sure he controlled the scene with a firearm. With Stine, a gun is a more pragmatic weapon than a knife, especially during a murder that takes place on a city street.

What doesn’t change is signature. I probably would have said overkill is a signature element of the Zodiac murders, but he dispatched two of the male victims with a coup de grace to the head. No overkill there, just trying to eliminate the biggest threat. He spent the most time at LB, and this is where you see the most grotesque expression of his psychopathy. Think of Mary Jane Kelly and Jack the Ripper. She had a room, he didn’t have to kill her on the street. He could take his time and it was his worst murder in terms of mutilation of the body.

His hatred of women is evident as he always made sure the female victim died. Plus there was a clear sexual element ("killing is more fun than getting your rocks off with a girl"). However to me the signature is attention and power. Zodiac craved it and loved the publicity/notoriety his murders garnered. He started by calling victims, then the police, then writing the newspapers. He increased the terror quotient by writing on the car door at LB, and then Stine’s shirt which was intended to not only provide proof of the authenticity of the letter but horrify the public as well. Then in the absence of any confirmed murders, there is the school bus threat. All calculated to scare the crap of out people in the Bay Area, even going so far as to demand they wear some nice Z buttons.

A couple other ideas: Z obviously had relatively decent verbal skills. I think he was able to pass himself off as harmless. CJB went along with him, he spent a great deal of time talking to the victims at LB, and likely spoke with Stine as well. Like BTK, he tried to allay their fears about him until he had them defenseless and under his control. That’s when his real personality took over.

And he was obviously intelligent too. I am a college graduate and the only time I have ever heard of radians was in the Zodiac letter. (Maybe that is more an indictment of me or the American educational system.). The chemical bombs…it points to someone who is pretty sharp. Plus, and this is probably related to his psychopathy, Z was remarkably calm in a crisis. If he had just gunned down Stine and was immediately stopped by Foulkes and Zelms, he was able to divert their attention and, in the process, not attract any suspicion onto himself.

Finally Zodiac mentioned in a letter that he wears a disguise when he "did his thing" and otherwise looks entirely different. Might this explain the different witness descriptions of him? Wearing a wig, having his hair in a pompadour…now the hood, well that was just a personal fantasy I think. The Lord High Executioner.

DoctorS–I don’t know if "he always made sure the female victim died" is accurate. It was probably just luck. He shot the hell out of Mike Mageau. He viciously stabbed Bryan. I think it was purely coincidence the females died. Even then, they didn’t die right away. Darlene was still alive when the police got there, and Cecelia actually lived for a couple of days. Is that "making sure"?

When it comes to radians, it might just be something you forgot about. They teach it in 8th grade math. Or at least they used to. It’s also used more often in trigonometry. It’s just another form of measurement for degrees. Makes sense if Zodiac was trying to pinpoint a location of something. I only bring this up because the use of radians doesn’t speak of some sort of genius. Just that he knew about radians and degrees and how they relate.

Yes, the male victims were certainly fortunate to have survived. However you can’t deny that the women were shot or stabbed more than the men. Don’t know if that is a horrible coincidence or intent. Although I submit it is intent,only one person can answer that for sure and he isn’t talking.

My statement was that he was pretty sharp, not a genius. We can engage in semantics here and say that his interest in opera, cryptography and chemistry (and yes radians!) were derived from interests and hobbies and not a reflection of his IQ. That may indeed be true; I am speculating. He was certainly organized and in many ways criminally sophisticated. And yes, he was also very lucky.

Every school is different, but in the U.S., radians are traditionally first introduced when a student takes trig. Degrees are used up until that point. And (this is the debatable part), I don’t think a person who struggled with math classes and just had a brief exposure to the concept would choose to use them if that makes sense. (That’s just a gut feeling based on my years communicating math to others. Could be wrong.) So, I agree with the general idea that simply using radians doesn’t mean that he’s all that intelligent, but assuming he used the term correctly (and that’s definitely a shaky assumption since the Mt. Diablo problem is unsolved, I get that) it does suggest that he wasn’t mathphobic and that he probably had some interests in the math/sciences/engineering area. A very minor clue, perhaps, but still a clue.

Well one mystery is solved, albeit a personal one. I never took trig, even in high school. Graduated from a liberal arts college and only took the requisite math classes. I am very mathphobic. That, coupled with fingerprints and handwriting, should effectively rule me out as a Z suspect!

Well one mystery is solved, albeit a personal one. I never took trig, even in high school. Graduated from a liberal arts college and only took the requisite math classes. I am very mathphobic. That, coupled with fingerprints and handwriting, should effectively rule me out as a Z suspect!

Unless there were multiple Zodiac’s who had their children write the letters and the ciphers were all a ruse…you could still be in the mix!

I will enter a plea of Not Guilty!

By reason of insanity?

Of course. All six of my personalities agree!