I'm as interested in the case as anyone (although I know there are others on the board who are more well-versed in the case than I), but this is an intriguing theory that I think should be taken seriously.

http://raasnio.com/GenerationWhyPodcast/the-zodiac-killer-hoax/

Thomas Horan thinks that there never was a Zodiac and the murders were unrelated, but one or more people toyed with the media claiming to be a serial killer, and overwhelmed/irresponsible police departments were all too happy to go along with the theory that there was a mad man on the loose. This was re-inforced by Graysmith's book which has been taken as gospel by many over the years. Horan researched actual police records and pointed out where Graysmith got it wrong (or lied) about events related to the murders.

Horan sounds a little too sure of his own theories for my taste (but I don't think that's a-typical of male academics), but I think it's worth a listen.

I have not heard of this theory before. I'll click the link when I have a computer in front of me (using my smart phone right now). But I would love to hear more about this theory.

1) Right after 2 of the couples were attacked, a man called the police and told them he did it. We're talking to minutes to hours after, there would not have been enough time for the general public to know about it in order to hoax it.

2) Within days of the cab driver murder, a piece of his bloody shirt along with a hand written letter consistent with other hand written Zodiac letters was mailed to the newspaper. How could a hoaxer get a hold of his shirt within days of the attack?

Now is it possible some of the letters are fake? Absolutely. But based on the above evidence, the killer and letter writer are either the same guy, or at least part of a group.

1) Right after 2 of the couples were attacked, a man called the police and told them he did it. We're talking to minutes to hours after, there would not have been enough time for the general public to know about it in order to hoax it.

2) Within days of the cab driver murder, a piece of his bloody shirt along with a hand written letter consistent with other hand written Zodiac letters was mailed to the newspaper. How could a hoaxer get a hold of his shirt within days of the attack?

Now is it possible some of the letters are fake? Absolutely. But based on the above evidence, the killer and letter writer are either the same guy, or at least part of a group.

I think you should listen to the podcast. He addresses your first point. Whether you buy his theory or not is up to you.

I'm as interested in the case as anyone (although I know there are others on the board who are more well-versed in the case than I), but this is an intriguing theory that I think should be taken seriously.

http://raasnio.com/GenerationWhyPodcast/the-zodiac-killer-hoax/

Thomas Horan thinks that there never was a Zodiac and the murders were unrelated, but one or more people toyed with the media claiming to be a serial killer, and overwhelmed/irresponsible police departments were all too happy to go along with the theory that there was a mad man on the loose. This was re-inforced by Graysmith's book which has been taken as gospel by many over the years. Horan researched actual police records and pointed out where Graysmith got it wrong (or lied) about events related to the murders.

Horan sounds a little too sure of his own theories for my taste (but I don't think that's a-typical of male academics), but I think it's worth a listen.

I thought you were worried about posting anything about Zodiac, concerned he might come after you.

Now you question his existence? :eek:

I have a hard time buying that the whole thing was a "hoax". Whoever murdered Paul Stine obviously was writing letters to the SF Chronicle and using his bloody shirt as proof that he was the murderer. And he was taking credit for the other murders and giving details that only the killer would know. And he was using the famous Zodiac symbol in these letters. The Lake Berryessa murder/attack also featured the Zodiac symbol (on Bryan Hartnell's car) and also bragged about the previous murders. I don't think it was just a couple of guys murdering people who decided to toy with the media by acting like a madman was on the loose, I think they were all the work of one guy. The biggest piece of evidence against the hoax theory: there were several murders in the SF area during the time period of the Zodiac killer's years of silence...why no letters written during this time taking credit for these murders?

I totally believe he existed. He (the killer) knew details of the crimes that no one else but the killer could know. Plus I don't see differences in the letters to suggest more than killer or hoax letters. This case has always intrigued me. But I know that it will never be solved. I believe the Zodiac killer is dead and has been for a long time.

I can see either theory being correct. The timeline of events is just to wide for me to think it was one person. The changing of people were killed is just strange. It's not like San Francisco doesn't have any lovers lanes. How everything stopped randomly after almost a whole year doesn't make any sense either to me.

This is a side point, but related to the OP.

Why is there a tendency on crime boards to wonder if a murder/murderer were all a hoax/not a murder? I have seen this in so many threads here, and on other crime boards in general.

I don't have time to listen to any podcasts, but I would love to hear the reaction to letting the SFPD know that the Zodiac doesn't exist. Maybe whoever made that podcast can record that for his next show. Look around the associated sites - this is fringe conspiracy material.

Just to give the board some idea of the other 'theories' of the podcast:


The Vitamin Hoax. Most of us believe that we aren’t necessarily getting all of the nutrition that we need from the food we consume. Fast food, microwaves, frozen foods, exercise, & other factors have at least half of us concerned enough that we take multivitamins to make up the difference. But how many of us have considered some very important questions? Do these supplements work? Are they even necessary? Justin & Aaron discuss vitamins and supplements and try to answer whether or not they are simply a hoax.


Zodiac and Vitamins, both hoaxes. Gotcha.

This is a side point, but related to the OP.

Why is there a tendency on crime boards to wonder if a murder/murderer were all a hoax/not a murder? I have seen this in so many threads here, and on other crime boards in general.

I don't have time to listen to any podcasts, but I would love to hear the reaction to letting the SFPD know that the Zodiac doesn't exist. Maybe whoever made that podcast can record that for his next show. Look around the associated sites - this is fringe conspiracy material.

Just to give the board some idea of the other 'theories' of the podcast:



Zodiac and Vitamins, both hoaxes. Gotcha.

I couldn't tell you why. I think in this particular case (and I didn't listen to the whole podcast) for me there are to large of gaps between the killings and the letters being written. With the exception of the Paul Stine letter which the Chronicle got 3 or 4 days after the killing. Could it all have been 1 person? That definitely seems probable. You can't put the whole blame on law enforcement for not catching the Zodiac either. I'm pretty sure the press saw this as a way cash in and sell a lot of newspapers. The way it was handled in the press wasn't all that great. Everyone had a lead and I'm going to guess that there were at least a dozen credible leads that could have had the potential to catch Z.

BTW I'm a Flinestones kid.

OT:

Homeboy does kind of have a point. While not a "hoax" per se, the vast majority of Americans do receive sufficient amounts of vitamins in their daily diet (yes, even in that godawful so-called "American" diet of processed crap). Multivitamins are essentially the greatest thing going if you want to make a few quick dollars off well-intentioned, health-conscious people. And for saturating your urine with Vitamin C. :)

Nothing is a bigger scam than Vitamin Water. As soon as I saw that product on the shelves I nearly fell to my knees in laughter. Then I wondered why I hadn't thought of it, and raked in all the tens of millions from suckers.

The guy who came up with Vitamin Water is spending millions trying to buy a spot as a prominent owner of thoroughbred race horses.

OT:

Homeboy does kind of have a point. While not a "hoax" per se, the vast majority of Americans do receive sufficient amounts of vitamins in their daily diet (yes, even in that godawful so-called "American" diet of processed crap). Multivitamins are essentially the greatest thing going if you want to make a few quick dollars off well-intentioned, health-conscious people. And for saturating your urine with Vitamin C. :)

I enjoy that processed crap!

I enjoy that processed crap!

Hey, no shame! I just had a waffle bowl of birthday cake ice cream last night and it was probably the most glorious thing I have ever eaten in my life.

All I can say about the Zodiac is that he was an escaped convict from Deer Lodge, Montana...

I listened to this podcast and the author makes a great argument.

Accusations of hoaxes and conspiracies regarding a wide array of topics are made so frequently that it is easy to reject them as nonsense. "Hoax" isn't the best descriptor in this case. The author's theory attributes the Zodiac Killer to errors and suppositions made by LE (although there is obviously some hoax aspect that explains the letters).

The author presents a well-thought-out theory, even if it may be false. Those really interested in the Zodiac killings should listen to the podcast themselves. It's free, it's an easy listen and I think it's only about an hour long. It may not change your mind, but it can definitely provide a different perspective and new information about what may have happened.

Who knows? Maybe causing the public to question the existence of the Zodiac is a hoax in itself. ;)

Hey, no shame! I just had a waffle bowl of birthday cake ice cream last night and it was probably the most glorious thing I have ever eaten in my life.

I too had cake and chocolate peanut butter ice cream, which was awesome, but it made me feel like a pig in the morning!

This is a side point, but related to the OP.

Why is there a tendency on crime boards to wonder if a murder/murderer were all a hoax/not a murder? I have seen this in so many threads here, and on other crime boards in general.

I don't have time to listen to any podcasts, but I would love to hear the reaction to letting the SFPD know that the Zodiac doesn't exist. Maybe whoever made that podcast can record that for his next show. Look around the associated sites - this is fringe conspiracy material.

Just to give the board some idea of the other 'theories' of the podcast:



Zodiac and Vitamins, both hoaxes. Gotcha.

If you actually listened to their podcast you would see their point of view is that they are not simply a hoax. They don't just have a chat on various issues, they research all their stories in depth.
But oh that's right, you don't have the time...if you don't have the time then you at this stage you have no right to comment.

Scary Fog: Well, no, the prank phone calls were actually made 30 and 45 minutes after police were first dispatched to the crime scenes. And the caller(s) only repeated information (some of it incorrect) that was broadcast in those dispatches. In Vallejo, there were actually two phone calls, one by an off-duty cop who thought police hadn't responded to the shooting yet.

According to the blood stains and other fiber evidence on the cab driver's shirt and the three pieces mailed in three "Zodiac" letters, those pieces were torn off the shirt AFTER the body had been removed from the cab. A Chronicle reporter named Keith Power definitely pilfered Stine's trip sheet from the cab and is therefore the most likely person to have torn a couple more small pieces off the shirt while it was lying unattended on a lab countertop drying.

Hi, everyone! According to the actual law enforcement agency files in these cases, Robert Graysmith (real name Robert Smith, Jr and yes, there is a reason why he changed his name) told several kinds of lies in his 1986 book, ZODIAC. 1. He made up things to fill in certain blanks (SOP in the "True" Crime genre); 2. He told lies (and continues to lie) in an attempt to frame Arthur Leigh Allen for being the so-called Zodiac Killer; 3. He lied about the supposed links between murders; 4. He lied about the "lack" of solid suspects in each murder; and most stunning: 5. He lied about the authenticity of the letters received by the San Francisco Chronicle and other newspapers.

A thorough reading of the 2500 or so pages of original police department, California DOJ, and FBI files and contemporary newspaper articles reveals that 1. Not only are there no real links between these murders, there was in fact more evidence, including fingerprints, found at each scene than Graysmith claims, and NONE of that evidence links ANY TWO of these murders; 2. There were, in fact, very very good suspects in each murder (but not the ones Graysmith dismisses in his book), none of who could be the "Zodiac;" 3. The "facts" stated in the Zodiac letters are often false, and obviously came from certain pages in those police reports related to the first two murders, plus information about the murder of the cab driver in SF obtained by a Chronicle reporter named Keith Power. Power undoubtedly removed the trip sheet from the cab (SFPD still don't have it) and apparently tore two more pieces from the cab driver's blood stained shirt while it was left to dry in the SFPD crime lab. 4. Further, "Zodiac" in his letters claims to be two different but very real "suspects" known to police who could not have been the actual murderers—and who were never mentioned by reporters. In other words, Zodiac knew things the actual killers COULDN'T have known.

When law enforcement held their interdepartmental conference on "Zodiac" in SF a week after the cab driver was shot, Power was suddenly and permanently taken off the Zodiac story and Paul Avery, who had been reporting various holes in "Zodiac's" credibility, was reassigned to PROMOTE the Zodiac story from then on (Graysmith lied about all this, as well). At that point, Zodiac's hand printing changed, his personality changed, his motive for writing the letters changed, and he never again stuck his nose in an actual murder investigation. And law enforcement stopped wasting resources looking for the "Zodiac."

By tracing a very short list of people who had access to those pages from the police reports concerning those first two murders, one of them is seen to have handprinting identical to "Zodiac's."

Finally, much is made about the assailant who stabbed the two kids at Lake Berryessa displaying a circled crosshair symbol on his costume and leaving a message on the victim's car door which supposedly resembles "Zodiac's" handprinting. However, local newspapers had printed photocopies of Zodiac's entire first letter, including the symbol, on their front pages, in hopes that a reader might recognize the handprinting or the symbol. The only detail they had withheld was the name "Zodiac." Neither the assailant, nor the prank caller to Napa police, had "remembered" to tell the victims or the police "I'm the Zodiac." And of course, "Zodiac" never wrote a letter about that attack. Ever. In other words, a copycat slayer. In fact, as a result of my own research, the the FBI in summer 2012 released additional pages concerning a very good suspect in the Lake Berryessa attack who was still stationed in Germany at the time of the first murder.

Until now, everyone, including Mr Stewart, who has written about or made a movie or documentary about "Zodiac" has relied on Graysmith and his books. However, now that these documents have made their way into the public domain, it turns out that Graysmith is a massive fraud who has misled millions of people for profit and set up innocent people like Mr Stewart for terrible embarrassment. But anyone can now compare Graysmith's books and Zodiac's letters to these files and see for themselves what a massive fraud it all is.

Princess: Well, the problem is, according to the actual police files, which have stumbled their way into the public domain the last couple of years, No, "Zodiac" didn't have first hand knowledge of those crimes. Some of his "facts" were actually wrong, and he knew things the actual killer(s) could NOT have known. By following that trail of facts, we come to a very short list of people who had access to "Zodiac's" facts, we find a person whose handprinting matches Zodiac's exactly.

Cars: Well, the local papers had printed a photocopy of the first letter, including the circled crosshair symbol, on the front page, hoping someone might recognize the handwriting or the symbol. What no one had printed as of September 27, 1969, was the name "Zodiac." Strange thing is, he forgot to tell Bryan and Cecelia, and the Napa dispatcher, "I'm ZODIAC!!!"

Also, in the calls to police, the caller(s) actually stated wrong "facts." Just one more thing Graysmith (real name Robert Smith, Jr) lies about in his book.

I listened to this podcast and the author makes a great argument.

Accusations of hoaxes and conspiracies regarding a wide array of topics are made so frequently that it is easy to reject them as nonsense. "Hoax" isn't the best descriptor in this case. The author's theory attributes the Zodiac Killer to errors and suppositions made by LE (although there is obviously some hoax aspect that explains the letters).

The author presents a well-thought-out theory, even if it may be false. Those really interested in the Zodiac killings should listen to the podcast themselves. It's free, it's an easy listen and I think it's only about an hour long. It may not change your mind, but it can definitely provide a different perspective and new information about what may have happened.

Who knows? Maybe causing the public to question the existence of the Zodiac is a hoax in itself. ;)
Ava: Sorry for nitpicking, but no, I don't attribute the Zodiac Hoax to errors made by LE. I attribute it to lies printed by Graysmith and others. LE had figured out by October 1969 that the letters were a hoax, and apparently even knew who was doing it. At that point, a different person, with different handprinting, took over writing the letters. The number one suspect on THAT list is Graysmith himself. Ironically, Paul Avery started out writing articles debunking "Zodiac's" credibility, but after police figured out what was going on, Keith Power was banned from the story and Avery suddenly became Zodiac's publicist. (He was buddies with Belli.) Coincidentally, just at the time when Avery was campaigning for a job at the LA Times, Zodiac wrote them a letter "confessing" to Avery's theory that Zodiac had murdered Cheri Jo Bates and promising the Times even more letters on even more murders "down there."

If you read this stuff (over 2500 pages, but worth it) in chronological order, there isn't any mystery at all.

Hi, everyone! According to the actual law enforcement agency files in these cases, Robert Graysmith (real name Robert Smith, Jr and yes, there is a reason why he changed his name) told several kinds of lies in his 1986 book, ZODIAC. 1. He made up things to fill in certain blanks (SOP in the "True" Crime genre); 2. He told lies (and continues to lie) in an attempt to frame Arthur Leigh Allen for being the so-called Zodiac Killer; 3. He lied about the supposed links between murders; 4. He lied about the "lack" of solid suspects in each murder; and most stunning: 5. He lied about the authenticity of the letters received by the San Francisco Chronicle and other newspapers.

A thorough reading of the 2500 or so pages of original police department, California DOJ, and FBI files and contemporary newspaper articles reveals that 1. Not only are there no real links between these murders, there was in fact more evidence, including fingerprints, found at each scene than Graysmith claims, and NONE of that evidence links ANY TWO of these murders; 2. There were, in fact, very very good suspects in each murder (but not the ones Graysmith dismisses in his book), none of who could be the "Zodiac;" 3. The "facts" stated in the Zodiac letters are often false, and obviously came from certain pages in those police reports related to the first two murders, plus information about the murder of the cab driver in SF obtained by a Chronicle reporter named Keith Power. Power undoubtedly removed the trip sheet from the cab (SFPD still don't have it) and apparently tore two more pieces from the cab driver's blood stained shirt while it was left to dry in the SFPD crime lab. 4. Further, "Zodiac" in his letters claims to be two different but very real "suspects" known to police who could not have been the actual murderers—and who were never mentioned by reporters. In other words, Zodiac knew things the actual killers COULDN'T have known.

When law enforcement held their interdepartmental conference on "Zodiac" in SF a week after the cab driver was shot, Power was suddenly and permanently taken off the Zodiac story and Paul Avery, who had been reporting various holes in "Zodiac's" credibility, was reassigned to PROMOTE the Zodiac story from then on (Graysmith lied about all this, as well). At that point, Zodiac's hand printing changed, his personality changed, his motive for writing the letters changed, and he never again stuck his nose in an actual murder investigation. And law enforcement stopped wasting resources looking for the "Zodiac."

By tracing a very short list of people who had access to those pages from the police reports concerning those first two murders, one of them is seen to have handprinting identical to "Zodiac's."

Finally, much is made about the assailant who stabbed the two kids at Lake Berryessa displaying a circled crosshair symbol on his costume and leaving a message on the victim's car door which supposedly resembles "Zodiac's" handprinting. However, local newspapers had printed photocopies of Zodiac's entire first letter, including the symbol, on their front pages, in hopes that a reader might recognize the handprinting or the symbol. The only detail they had withheld was the name "Zodiac." Neither the assailant, nor the prank caller to Napa police, had "remembered" to tell the victims or the police "I'm the Zodiac." And of course, "Zodiac" never wrote a letter about that attack. Ever. In other words, a copycat slayer. In fact, as a result of my own research, the the FBI in summer 2012 released additional pages concerning a very good suspect in the Lake Berryessa attack who was still stationed in Germany at the time of the first murder.

Until now, everyone, including Mr Stewart, who has written about or made a movie or documentary about "Zodiac" has relied on Graysmith and his books. However, now that these documents have made their way into the public domain, it turns out that Graysmith is a massive fraud who has misled millions of people for profit and set up innocent people like Mr Stewart for terrible embarrassment. But anyone can now compare Graysmith's books and Zodiac's letters to these files and see for themselves what a massive fraud it all is.
Over the last few years, all of the actual police department and FBI files related to the so-called "Zodiac" murders have become available in the public domain. It's over 2500 pages of material, but the most essential 1000 pages can be seen here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/112412867@N06/collections/

If you'd like a free "study guide" for reading these documents (and for debunking Robert Smith aka Robert Graysmith's "non" fiction book ZODIAC) you can start here:

http://zodiackillerhoax1986.freeforums.net

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMnVLP1dcsOCNQEudrNsdsQ

Or here:

http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-generation-why-podcast

If you're interested.

Strange thing is, he forgot to tell Bryan and Cecelia, and the Napa dispatcher, "I'm ZODIAC!!!"

This is a fair point, and one I never thought about before. For someone who seemed intent on making his presence known and taunting people, he sure didn't do a good job with the Berryessa attack. The killer did leave the familiar "calling card" on Hartnell's car though.

I think the Zodiac exists - if only in the context that someone killed those people, and had at least some contact with the police, and I think that the police believe that one person is behind more than one of the murders (but probably not more than 5).

however, I feel that Graysmith "made up" at least some details in his book which have been perpetuated into all of the other books and movies and the general perception of the case - which makes me think that it would not be inconceivable that he could have "made up" or at least exaggerated/doctored/messed-with the original evidence in the case.

I have not had time to listen to the podcast, I went through some of the info on the site, but it would be more helpful if the information was presented in a simpler format, or the "study guide" as it were.

Ava: Sorry for nitpicking, but no, I don't attribute the Zodiac Hoax to errors made by LE. I attribute it to lies printed by Graysmith and others. LE had figured out by October 1969 that the letters were a hoax, and apparently even knew who was doing it. At that point, a different person, with different handprinting, took over writing the letters. The number one suspect on THAT list is Graysmith himself. Ironically, Paul Avery started out writing articles debunking "Zodiac's" credibility, but after police figured out what was going on, Keith Power was banned from the story and Avery suddenly became Zodiac's publicist. (He was buddies with Belli.) Coincidentally, just at the time when Avery was campaigning for a job at the LA Times, Zodiac wrote them a letter "confessing" to Avery's theory that Zodiac had murdered Cheri Jo Bates and promising the Times even more letters on even more murders "down there."

If you read this stuff (over 2500 pages, but worth it) in chronological order, there isn't any mystery at all.

(My reply is in response to the last posts by ThomasHenryHoran, not only the post included above)

Yikes!! I will re-listen to the podcast. The message I took away is that the creation of the Zodiac Killer was partially built upon fallacies and "over-linkage." Of course there was some aspect of hoax or intentional misdirection involved. If people are not eager to listen to a podcast about the possibility of the Zodiac Killer being a hoax (because, let's be honest, it sounds far-fetched) then maybe you could lead with some other detail of your theory to create credibility and entice interest.

I didn't feel as if the posters were giving your ideas a fair chance or were willing to listen to the podcast. Your posts don't do much to open readers' minds. They are so detailed that I ended up just scanning over them or they are just a litany of the many lies you think Robert Graysmith has told.

I am interested in the case and in new theories and I have the time to listen to a podcast while I'm working around the house, but I don't keep copious notes or recall everything the key players have said or done. I don't know when I will be able to read the 2,500 pages of police/FBI files!

I will listen to the podcast again and hopefully take away a more accurate message. I do hope others will listen, in spite of everything else.

Ava and Robyrob:

It's a LOT of material to go through. Believe me, I understand. The new website that Robyrob wishes were simpler is not only as simple as I can make it (hitting the high points as it were) but it's only just begun. I have the scripts for AT LEAST 20 more short videos, and they only hit the high points in order to direct people to the website.

The main problem: Graysmith didn't just lie about one or two things, getting "most of it about right." There's an average of almost one lie for every page of his book. And his book has been the source for every other book or movie or TV show ever made on "Zodiac."

The second problem is, there's more than one hoax. The first three Zodiac letters (July 31, August 2, and October 13) started it. Then, someone else (most likely Graysmith and Avery) took over writing "Zodiac" letters. Then, Graysmith wrote a book and changed his name. That book got canceled, so he wrote another book, this time framing Arthur Leigh Allen. This book got published. In that book, he not only lies about the police department files he got access to, but he lies about his job at the Chronicle, tells really big lies about Allen, lies about some of the other people involved, including "witnesses" and investigators, and then continued to lie after the book was published.

Anyone can see all of this for themselves. It's only 2500 pages. ;) But there's no doubt about it—his "book" is the biggest and most successful hoax of the 20th century. Or was, I should say. Remember—those kids and their families never got ANY justice. And these hoaxes are partly to blame for that.

This is a fair point, and one I never thought about before. For someone who seemed intent on making his presence known and taunting people, he sure didn't do a good job with the Berryessa attack. The killer did leave the familiar "calling card" on Hartnell's car though.


Yes - it always struck me as bizarre how he completely changes his MO for that attack (attacking during daylight, binding victims, using a knife, dressing in a weird costume, conversing with his victms at length). If the handwriting on Hartnell's car is arguably different to that in the letters, I can completely buy the idea that it's a copycat.

I don't know whether Graysmith was involved in any hoax, but he always struck me as an obsessive and a bit of a crank - I tried to read one of his Zodiac books and just gave it up as a repetitive, disorganised, hysterical mess.

When somebody bases a theory on a copycat, the caliber of argument is front and center and laughable.

It reminds me of the Ear-Ons board on A&E forums a few years ago, when a very well respected poster devoted hundreds of posts on his pet theory of EAR A an EAR B. Two different perpetrators, one intentionally taking advantage of the other. Like the gentleman who is suddenly in this thread, the poster on that forum was well armed with deflective material. He brainwashed at least a dozen regular posters into marching right along with him. They craved so-called specifics in an otherwise vague and frustrating old case.

Don't allow the newcomer to do similar damage here. As I emphasized on that EAR Ons forum, big picture generalities overwhelm a desperate attempt to pinpoint specifics where they don't fit and don't belong. The fact that he has his own suspect is a predictable attachment. Playing detective to the hilt.

Many sharp posters here recognize the value of Occam's razor. In this case, that means one perpetrator who indeed existed and simply managed to elude capture or identification. The later two variables are not bizarre, they are normalcy. A plane disappearing on a large planet covered primarily by water similarly is not nearly as unlikely as the television talking heads want to pretend. Luckily we don't have many crashes so the sample size is extremely small. Just wait until the conspiratorial goofs get hold of that case, in dozens of books to follow with some of them no doubt already in production. Those claims will make the lunacy in this thread seem like a bubble bath.

Fortunately DNA evidence surfaced several years ago to conclusively link the known EAR Ons to murders in Goleta, ones that were confidently denied as EAR attacks by the poster on the other site. It was far too late. The board was sidetracked beyond repair and never recovered. That can't happen here because this is merely one case among many, not the sole focus. Regardless, allow a sense of applied probability to reject low percentage babble and move on, to real world linkage like Richard Floyd McCoy as DB Cooper. :D

When somebody bases a theory on a copycat, the caliber of argument is front and center and laughable.

It reminds me of the Ear-Ons board on A&E forums a few years ago, when a very well respected poster devoted hundreds of posts on his pet theory of EAR A an EAR B. Two different perpetrators, one intentionally taking advantage of the other. Like the gentleman who is suddenly in this thread, the poster on that forum was well armed with deflective material. He brainwashed at least a dozen regular posters into marching right along with him. They craved so-called specifics in an otherwise vague and frustrating old case.

Don't allow the newcomer to do similar damage here. As I emphasized on that EAR Ons forum, big picture generalities overwhelm a desperate attempt to pinpoint specifics where they don't fit and don't belong. The fact that he has his own suspect is a predictable attachment. Playing detective to the hilt.

Many sharp posters here recognize the value of Occam's razor. In this case, that means one perpetrator who indeed existed and simply managed to elude capture or identification. The later two variables are not bizarre, they are normalcy. A plane disappearing on a large planet covered primarily by water similarly is not nearly as unlikely as the television talking heads want to pretend. Luckily we don't have many crashes so the sample size is extremely small. Just wait until the conspiratorial goofs get hold of that case, in dozens of books to follow with some of them no doubt already in production. Those claims will make the lunacy in this thread seem like a bubble bath.

Fortunately DNA evidence surfaced several years ago to conclusively link the known EAR Ons to murders in Goleta, ones that were confidently denied as EAR attacks by the poster on the other site. It was far too late. The board was sidetracked beyond repair and never recovered. That can't happen here because this is merely one case among many, not the sole focus. Regardless, allow a sense of applied probability to reject low percentage babble and move on, to real world linkage like Richard Floyd McCoy as DB Cooper. :D
Dooger: What? Re: Occam's Razor. According to the actual police department files, which you can easily read for yourself, fingerprints not belonging to Mike Mageau were found on the passenger door handle of Darlene's Corvair. Contrary to what Graysmith states in his book. Unidentified fingerprints were found on the passenger door of Bryan's car. Fingerprints Graysmith claims belonged to the killer (they didn't, but we're using your razor, not mine) were found on the drivers door of Stine's cab. Fingerprints were found on the receiver of the pay phone in Napa (Graysmith falsely claims that these were "smudged" by Hal Snook, but according to the FBI report, they were just fine.) And a plethora of fingerprints were developed from various Zodiac letters. According to the FBI's own official reports, the number of matches between ANY TWO of these fingerprints is . . . ZERO. What does your razor say about that? Etc etc etc.

A stunning number of "facts" Graysmith claims he obtained from these documents are flat contradicted by those very documents. For all to see. Including you.

Please, don't take my word for any of this. Read the documents for yourself. They're freely available, and not only at the links I provided.

that's the part that bothers me - even if there was more than one killer, and even if more than one person was messing with the police sending in letters and making phone calls, how could NONE of the DNA or fingerprints be a match to each other, or to ANYONE at all?

I thought you were worried about posting anything about Zodiac, concerned he might come after you.

Now you question his existence? :eek:

No no...that was EAR-ONS. :(

Many sharp posters here recognize the value of Occam's razor.
I'm not wholeheartedly endorsing the hoax theory (and in fact think "hoax" is not the best way to characterize the argument), but I disagree with your assessment of Occam's Razor in this context. Another way to express Occam's Razor would be, "When you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras." From my perspective, and from a statistical perspective, the serial killer would be the zebra and multiple unrelated murders would be the horses.

I didn't feel as if the posters were giving your ideas a fair chance or were willing to listen to the podcast. Your posts don't do much to open readers' minds. They are so detailed that I ended up just scanning over them or they are just a litany of the many lies you think Robert Graysmith has told.

I am interested in the case and in new theories and I have the time to listen to a podcast while I'm working around the house, but I don't keep copious notes or recall everything the key players have said or done. I don't know when I will be able to read the 2,500 pages of police/FBI files!

I will listen to the podcast again and hopefully take away a more accurate message. I do hope others will listen, in spite of everything else.


ThomasHenryHoran, I'm glad you have joined the discussion! But I have to agree with Ava's point above. It's so easy to get bogged down in all of the details, and while it's true that all of the documents are available to us, *REAL TALK* the rest of us just aren't going to put in those hours of grunt work. So I think it's on you to present it as a cohesive story. I hope that's taken as constructive criticism, as I think you have some good points.

Personally, I was not impressed with Graysmith's book, but it would help to know what you think his motivations are/were. Is he a kook, a phony, a fraud just looking to cash in?

I have always been frustrated by the fact that ALA was proved NOT to be the Zodiac and yet he fit the evidence so perfectly. How could it NOT be him for goodness sake?? I think the idea that we've had an unreliable narrator all along is exciting. If you're correct, makes a lot of pieces of the puzzle fit for me.

Zodiac and Vitamins, both hoaxes. Gotcha.

There's actually very little scientific evidence that vitamin supplements are beneficial for your health. (http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1789253) If your doc is still telling you to take a multivitamin, they're behind on the research. I think it's a worthy topic.

ThomasHenryHoran, I'm glad you have joined the discussion! But I have to agree with Ava's point above. It's so easy to get bogged down in all of the details, and while it's true that all of the documents are available to us, *REAL TALK* the rest of us just aren't going to put in those hours of grunt work. So I think it's on you to present it as a cohesive story. I hope that's taken as constructive criticism, as I think you have some good points.

Personally, I was not impressed with Graysmith's book, but it would help to know what you think his motivations are/were. Is he a kook, a phony, a fraud just looking to cash in?

I have always been frustrated by the fact that ALA was proved NOT to be the Zodiac and yet he fit the evidence so perfectly. How could it NOT be him for goodness sake?? I think the idea that we've had an unreliable narrator all along is exciting. If you're correct, makes a lot of pieces of the puzzle fit for me.

Here goes: A drug dealer/"informant" and his gang were bumping off snitches in and around Vallejo. A gung-ho narcotics cop and Criminal Science professor, reluctant to personally blow the whistle and get his own family shot, tried to call attention to what was going on by writing some high-profile "confessions" to the newspapers (with the help of a reporter.) An unrelated nutcase, inspired by these highly publicized letters, framed this "Cipher Slayer" for one of his own knife attacks (there were others.) After one more "confession" to shooting a cab driver, his fellow cops at a "Zodiac" conference in October, 1969 figure out what's been going on. He stops writing Zodiac letters, the reporter is banned from the Zodiac story permanently, and everyone goes back to business as usual. Then another reporter, Paul Avery, and another Chronicle employee (most likely Graysmith) start writing more letters. Eventually, the drug dealer and his buddies are convicted of other murders, etc, and Graysmith and Avery decide to write a book. That gets shot down. Graysmith writes another version of the book, framing Allen, which becomes a major best seller. Etc. In 1998, amateur sleuth Mike Rodelli wrestles away the FBI's copies of the original case files, and is double crossed by his partners, who start publishing (most of) these documents of their own websites starting in 2009.

How's that?

Nowhere Girl: There's a larger point here: It's a lot easier to just hand vultures like Graysmith money than it is to read something for ourselves. His story is a LOT more fun to read. Imagine David Fincher making a movie about a Robert Graysmith character simply lying thorough his teeth page after page. No one would watch that movie. But that's what happened. No one has to take my word for it. They can read these documents for themselves.

Well, let me restate one last time: Assuming I'm 100 percent right (and again, anyone can read these documents themselves, so yes, I am right) the question is, "Who cares?" More to the point, who is my audience, and what's the best way to continue to reach them? So, thanks for commenting!

Here goes: A drug dealer/"informant" and his gang were bumping off snitches in and around Vallejo. A gung-ho narcotics cop and Criminal Science professor, reluctant to personally blow the whistle and get his own family shot, tried to call attention to what was going on by writing some high-profile "confessions" to the newspapers (with the help of a reporter.) An unrelated nutcase, inspired by these highly publicized letters, framed this "Cipher Slayer" for one of his own knife attacks (there were others.) After one more "confession" to shooting a cab driver, his fellow cops at a "Zodiac" conference in October, 1969 figure out what's been going on. He stops writing Zodiac letters, the reporter is banned from the Zodiac story permanently, and everyone goes back to business as usual. Then another reporter, Paul Avery, and another Chronicle employee (most likely Graysmith) start writing more letters. Eventually, the drug dealer and his buddies are convicted of other murders, etc, and Graysmith and Avery decide to write a book. That gets shot down. Graysmith writes another version of the book, framing Allen, which becomes a major best seller. Etc. In 1998, amateur sleuth Mike Rodelli wrestles away the FBI's copies of the original case files, and is double crossed by his partners, who start publishing (most of) these documents of their own websites starting in 2009.

How's that?

This is pretty concise. I think what has bothered me since digging into the case a little more is the actual timeline of events. The murders and letters. There just seems to be to large of gaps between murders and letters for my taste.

Elgordo: Although it's over 1000 pages, once they're sorted and read in chronological order, the story is pretty simple and surprisingly clear. For example, the famous phone call to Vallejo police 45 minutes after Mike and Darlene were shot, was printed in the newspaper July 7 BEFORE it was typed into Nancy Slover's report on July 8. In fact, she was only ordered to type a report by Captain Bird BECAUSE of the newspaper story. Etc etc etc. And it's even more obvious that Graysmith, who obviously did have access to these files (possibly because he was, at the time, ratting out Avery) simply lied and lied and lied about their contents. Filmmakers, TV shows, journalists, authors, and even some cops, have relied and continue to rely on his book. Until now.

Nowhere girl: I see I forgot to mention that the website linked to above is not a "book;" rather it is the footnotes for (probably three) books. So, that's why your question is so helpful to me—I need to remember that not everyone has read the "story" told by these files yet. I always get more publicity than I anticipate. The Generation Why Podcast (which is a GREAT show, by the way) brought me a lot more attention this past couple of weeks than I had prepared for. So, thanks again for your question! :)

There's a fantastic episode featuring Tom Westcott, who has done something similar with the Jack The Ripper story, an interview with an investigator into the Jon Benet Ramsey case, and many other great segments.

http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-generation-why-podcast

Nowhere girl: I see I forgot to mention that the website linked to above is not a "book;" rather it is the footnotes for (probably three) books. So, that's why your question is so helpful to me—I need to remember that not everyone has read the "story" told by these files yet. I always get more publicity than I anticipate. The Generation Why Podcast (which is a GREAT show, by the way) brought me a lot more attention this past couple of weeks than I had prepared for. So, thanks again for your question! :)

There's a fantastic episode featuring Tom Westcott, who has done something similar with the Jack The Ripper story, an interview with an investigator into the Jon Benet Ramsey case, and many other great segments.

http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-generation-why-podcast
Thanks for the summary. It was really helpful, and I'm glad it was helpful for you.

And I agree that David Fincher would probably not direct a movie about you pouring over police records and concluding that there's no serial killer lurking around San Francisco. (I do love that movie, though.)

At what point does ALA's name come into it? Where did Graysmith get his name? Was he a legit suspect in one of the murders?

I am totally hooked on Generation Why. They do a great job, and cover a lot of Unsolved Mysteries cases.

Thanks for the summary. It was really helpful, and I'm glad it was helpful for you.

And I agree that David Fincher would probably not direct a movie about you pouring over police records and concluding that there's no serial killer lurking around San Francisco. (I do love that movie, though.)

At what point does ALA's name come into it? Where did Graysmith get his name? Was he a legit suspect in one of the murders?

I am totally hooked on Generation Why. They do a great job, and cover a lot of Unsolved Mysteries cases.
Nowhere Girl: The actual Zodiac case files have almost nothing about Arthur Leigh Allen (apart from the obviously phony pages on Tom Voigt's website apparently "leaked" to Voigt by You-Know-Who) beyond John Lynch's brief note on October 7, 1969. What apparently happened was a Vallejo PD officer named Jack Mulanax investigated allegations of Allen molesting or attempting to molest children at a school where Allen was teaching in 1968. The charges were dropped, partly because such charges were even more difficult to prosecute then, and probably because Allen's parents often paid cash settlements to his alleged victims. But Mulanax never forgot. When a pop psychologist "diagnosed" the Zodiac Killer as a latent repressed homosexual and probable child molester after the knife attack at Lake Berryessa, a light went off in Mulanax's head—especially since Allen closely matched the limited descriptions of "Zodiac." (Bizarrely, Arthur Allen was an absolute dead ringer for another Lake Berryessa suspect and also resembled his older, much more suspicious brother.) Lynch, who didn't think much of Allen as a "Zodiac" suspect (and who probably knew who the real suspects were in the LHR and BRS shootings anyway) went to the school where Allen got a new job in 1969 and questioned him there—not at home—probably as much in an attempt to get Allen fired from yet another teaching job as to "catch" the Zodiac.

But Mulanax, with the help and encouragement of Don Cheney, who suspected (quite believably) Allen of trying to molest Cheney's own kids, kept up a kind of "Allen watch," convinced he was a good suspect in the "Zodiac" case. Cheney has changed his own story a number of times, and no one could corroborate any of the "facts" Cheney claimed implicated Allen, but it does seem that Mulanax's suspicions were sincere, if erroneous.

In the fall of 1970, when Avery trumpeted a "newly discovered" link between Zodiac and the Riverside murder of Cheri Jo Bates (which had already been thoroughly debunked by Riverside and Napa police) Cheney surfaced again. Allen did, after all, travel to Riverside on occasion. And that's pretty much the entire case against Allen.

However, as with anything involving Graysmith (real name: Robert Smith, Jr, a name you will run across in VPD's files), there is a murkier side to the frame around Allen. Graysmith claimed he first came across Allen as a Zodiac suspect in 1980—AFTER his first book deal was canceled. But it's clear from both Graysmith's writings and Nicolai's files that someone, and the finger points straight at Graysmith, had been trying to frame Allen at least as far back as January, 1971. For example, Graysmith has made much of a man matching Allen's description whom Fouke and Zelms supposedly spotted heading north on Maple street toward the park minutes after Stine was shot. (That man couldn't have been the shooter.) So, what? So, someone brought that "Fouke memo" personally to Nicolai's attention—in Januaryish, 1971. The precise moment when Graysmith himself claims he started "studying" Nicolai's Zodiac files. (Graysmith has also claimed that HE was the one who "discovered" the Fouke memo languishing in SFPD's files, the same way Avery claimed to find several "Bates had to die" letters and the Desktop Poem languishing in RPD's files.) In other words, right after Cheney, in response to a shaky story by Avery, was running around once again in late 1970, telling anyone who wouldn't listen and someone who would (Avery) about this hot "Zodiac" suspect named Arthur Leigh Allen.

When the still-unsolved string of hitchhiker slayings started in nearby Santa Rosa, Mulanax notified Santa Rosa police that Allen had moved into a trailer there. Allen's trailer was searched by police in late summer, 1972, with zero results. But Mulanax never gave up on him—and neither has Graysmith. Fingerprints, handprinting, and DNA (which Graysmith to this day has continued to lie about) all cleared Allen of ANY known connection to ANY "Zodiac" crime OR letter. Beyond the fish eye from an eager cop and a one man campaign by a disgruntled parent, there is ZERO reason to think Allen was ever anything but a creep.

Compare Mike Wakshull's analysis of the handwriting of Earl Best Jr to THIS handwriting: http://t.co/VtzJ3A4IyH

Here goes: A drug dealer/"informant" and his gang were bumping off snitches in and around Vallejo. A gung-ho narcotics cop and Criminal Science professor, reluctant to personally blow the whistle and get his own family shot, tried to call attention to what was going on by writing some high-profile "confessions" to the newspapers (with the help of a reporter.) An unrelated nutcase, inspired by these highly publicized letters, framed this "Cipher Slayer" for one of his own knife attacks (there were others.) After one more "confession" to shooting a cab driver, his fellow cops at a "Zodiac" conference in October, 1969 figure out what's been going on. He stops writing Zodiac letters, the reporter is banned from the Zodiac story permanently, and everyone goes back to business as usual. Then another reporter, Paul Avery, and another Chronicle employee (most likely Graysmith) start writing more letters. Eventually, the drug dealer and his buddies are convicted of other murders, etc, and Graysmith and Avery decide to write a book. That gets shot down. Graysmith writes another version of the book, framing Allen, which becomes a major best seller. Etc. In 1998, amateur sleuth Mike Rodelli wrestles away the FBI's copies of the original case files, and is double crossed by his partners, who start publishing (most of) these documents of their own websites starting in 2009.

How's that?
so, in this scenario, who is this "drug dealer/informant", and who is the "unrelated nutcase" that committed these other, unrelated knife attacks?

...and wouldn't said "unrelated nutcase", be the actual Zodiac in this scenario? he may not have committed all of the crimes attributed to the Zodiac, but a number of related knife attacks/murders that occurred around the same time?

I never believed Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac, but someone was doing these killings - whether he was actually sending these letters to the police or not.

Robyrob: The drug dealer in question was Villareal's pet, referred to around Vallejo as "Big Red." The first two Zodiac letters call attention to the fact that whenever any homicide investigation, including LHR and BRS, turned toward this Big Red and his associates, it would suddenly stop. That seems to be the purpose of creating the Zodiac Hoax—to get Dear Editor and his public to start asking questions. The unrelated copycat who stabbed Bryan, Cecelia, and possibly/probably several other young women in the area, did nothing at Lake Berryessa except imitate or otherwise cast suspicion on the Cipher Slayer as portrayed in the newspapers. The number one suspect in the LB attack was park ranger Dennis Land (and his brother, deputy sheriff Raymond Land.)

One other possible motive for creating the "Zodiac" is, of course, to give someone an alibi in advance for the LB style attacks. Problem is, if "Zodiac" is such a hot alibi for those attacks, why didn't "Zodiac" ever write a letter about any of them?

Hal Snook, the person whose handprinting matches the first three Zodiac letters may or may not have known Dennis, but Dennis was only discharged from overseas Army service in Spring, 1969. Dennis got his A.S. Degree in criminal justice from Napa College, but no one is entirely sure when Snook first started teaching there.

Clear as mud? The thing one must keep in mind is, contrary to Graysmith's claims, there are in fact ZERO real links between the Zodiac letters and ANY ACTUAL MURDER CASE. There are ZERO actual links between ANY TWO of these murders at all (except that a fistful of fingers pointed to Big Red's gang for both LHR and BRS). And of the real suspects (not the ones in G's book) NONE have handprinting, fingerprints, or ANY OTHER connection to the letters, nor to any TWO of these murders. The Zodiac was a purely fictional character created by a gung-ho cop and a reporter (or two.)

Except for debunking the frame around Allen, no one has ever bothered double checking Graysmith's claims (and the letters themselves) against these actual case files. Until I did, apparently. G got the names of the victims straight, but not much else.

Hey everybody:

The Generation Why Podcast did a follow-up episode (http://raasnio.com/GenerationWhyPodcast/zodiac-killer-hoax-revisited/) on this topic to clarify some points.

Wow great thread!
I'd like to add that if you all remember in the Boston Strangler segment that the woman researcher claimed that there was never a Boston Strangler, just some unrelated murders. That, it would be really simple to strangle someone you wanted murdered and play it off as another Boston strangler victim and get away with it scott free, since the police were looking for one crazed lunatic.
This very well could be the case in the zodiac, as well as many other serial killer murders. Maybe there are a few cases that were just "copycats". Maybe someone wanted to cause a media frenzy by somehow linking a few unrelated murders together through a fake serial killer.
If this is the case of the Zodiac I wonder who created the elaborate puzzles? And why the last one was unable to be solved?

I too had cake and chocolate peanut butter ice cream, which was awesome, but it made me feel like a pig in the morning!
Ever try Cheesecake ice cream? YUMMY!

Of course he existed. Now the question is who was writing the letters. The Zodiac or an accomplice

Hey everybody:

The Generation Why Podcast did a follow-up episode (http://raasnio.com/GenerationWhyPodcast/zodiac-killer-hoax-revisited/) on this topic to clarify some points.


The explanation was just as hard to follow as I'm guessing the original was. I have listened to it twice (in the car) and can't make heads nor tails of it.

The explanation was just as hard to follow as I'm guessing the original was. I have listened to it twice (in the car) and can't make heads nor tails of it.
Mysteryphile:

1. Thanks for listening!
2. It's about 2500 pages of original documents. Followed by 30 years of lies by Robert Graysmith.
3. I understand, believe me. My question is, will anyone care?
4. For example, would you yourself care enough to read three books totally over 1000 pages, or sit through 13+ one hour episodes of a documentary? Which parts would you care about most? The massive extent to which Graysmith created a massive fraud, or the answer to the question, "Who actually wrote the Zodiac Killer letters?"
5. Thanks again! Your feedback is extremely helpful to me in figuring out what to include and how to present it to people. For example, most "Zodiac" fans really, really don't want to know the whole thing was a hoax. Fair enough, but some people like to read about exposing hoaxes. But they might not care who really killed those kids. So, at this point, I'm just trying to figure out who the potential audience is, and what they are curious about, and how to explain it to them.

This episode might help:

http://tinyurl.com/ZodiacHoaxDebate

As others have said, the Zodiac Killer exists and anyone who has another theory doesn't know the facts of the case. I just don't think anyone will ever find out who he is, given the huge amount of effort spent already and the fact that the case is over 40 years old.

As others have said, the Zodiac Killer exists and anyone who has another theory doesn't know the facts of the case. I just don't think anyone will ever find out who he is, given the huge amount of effort spent already and the fact that the case is over 40 years old.

Yep, plus they have been doing these DNA tests for decades now but it is hard to see how they can know for sure that they have a legit Zodiac profile in the first place.

Also so many people with a grudge against their dad seem to be coming out in recent years saying he was the killer-you never hear anything much back about these cases so assume nothing ever comes of them.