DR. MARK HEWITT - A KILLER EXPOSED

10/1/2018

On September 27th 2018, the third installment of Dr. Mark Hewitt's trilogy of Zodiac books was released, entitled 'EXPOSED: The Zodiac Revealed. He has also outlined the focus of 'Exposed', naming Theodore Kaczynski as the most likely candidate for the Zodiac Killer in a blogtalkradio edition of True Murder, hosted by Dan Zupansky.
Dr. Mark Hewitt has dedicated many years to the Zodiac field from the standpoint of neutrality, and his first two books 'Hunted' and 'Profiled' are well researched using sourced material, police reports and FBI files, to name but a few. That impartiality has now changed with the release of his latest book 'Exposed'.

Book Three. Click for link.

When asked by the host Dan Zupansky the reaction he expects from the Zodiac community upon the release of his book, Dr. Mark Hewitt replied "I expect there will be a certain contingent of people who will be so wedded to their ideas that they won't take a serious look at my work, which they're free to do that. Some people are convinced that it is their father, their birth father or stepfather, other people are very convinced of this suspect or that suspect debated online. So, if you want to do research that contradicts my research - go for it - show me your evidence and explain to me how my arguments are wrong. I think I've been very reasoned and very careful about laying out facts using reason to come to the conclusions that I do. If my reasoning is faulty, or my conclusions are wrong, by all means point them out to me. There may be a contingent who say 'wow Mark you've been very thorough in your research and make a very compelling case.'"
I have not read the book as yet, but I am sure Mark has made a very compelling case for Theodore Kaczynski as the Zodiac Killer, as he is an extremely intelligent and thoughtful individual. There is certainly no way I could, or want to explain how his arguments are right or wrong, because opinions or arguments drawn from facts about the Zodiac case, are just that - an opinion. And as such, are perfectly acceptable. I could argue that the Zodiac Killer entered the Presidio Park after the murder of Paul Stine, and present many arguments to support such an opinion, but it can neither be proved right or wrong at this juncture.
I am confident Dr. Mark Hewitt's reasoning is not faulty, however, proving his conclusions or otherwise is akin to proving Zodiac didn't enter the park. Disproving Theodore Kaczynski as the Zodiac Killer, without DNA or conclusive fingerprint evidence, is as difficult as proving he was. Having seen many debates about suspects in the Zodiac case, the lack of certainty in the scientific evidence, means these sort of discussions produce little in the way of clarity or resolution one way or the other.
The best suggestion I could give to negate the premise of Theodore Kaczynski as the Zodiac Killer, would be to ask Mark to write a fourth book, presenting a solid case of why his suspect isn't the Zodiac Killer. I am confident Mark could achieve this, given his level of intelligence, and based on what I have read so far in his writings. Suspect driven books are wholly devoted to highlighting the arguments for the case, while the negative aspects that don't favor the suspect are routinely overlooked or casually ignored. That is the objective of any prosecutor or defense lawyer in most murder cases - presenting your case in the most favorable light - and as such, the true picture is rarely revealed. This extends to all aspects of the Zodiac case, including this website.

Book Two. Click for link.

I am not sure what level of confidence Dr. Mark Hewitt could give to his belief that Theodore Kaczynski was the Zodiac Killer, but now, he has a lens through which he will view the case, as with all Zodiac researchers who align to a particular suspect. When you approach any topic in the case, your suspect may bias your answer. This is best explained when we consider the sketch drawn up from eyewitness recollections at Presidio Heights.
Proponents of Ross Sullivan will augment their belief in him as the Zodiac Killer by stating the unmistakable likeness to the Presidio Heights sketch, while playing down the significance of the height difference. Ross Sullivan was 6'2" (6'3" in shoes), but the eyewitnesses described the suspect as between 5'8"-5'10". Every effort is made to mention this likeness in every argument, while the height difference is routinely explained away by the angle the eyewitnesses viewed the suspect. The teenagers were 50-60 feet away, viewing top-down, while Officer Donald Fouke was seated in a moving police vehicle. Nevertheless, their recollection of facial features in dim lighting under the same circumstances is unquestionably and routinely taken as accurate.
If Ross Sullivan had been 5'9" tall, I am confident this height match would have been undeniably given as further corroborating evidence to support Ross Sullivan as the Zodiac Killer, not explained away. Had Ross Sullivan not looked like the sketch, then the eyewitness recollection based on facial features would have been equally argued against based on the above reasons - and this reasoning is always tailored to each and every suspect to keep them in the frame. This explains why having a suspect alignment clouds your judgement when approaching the Zodiac story. You view the different aspects of the case through the lens of your suspect.
Dr. Mark Hewitt stated "show me your evidence and explain to me how my arguments are wrong." Unfortunately, with the DNA findings in 2002 being routinely dismissed as manufactured, the fingerprint evidence (even from the taxicab) being questioned as originating from the hand of our killer, and the subjective interpretation of handwriting, I'm afraid there is probably little else that can be described as evidence to convince anybody their argument is wrong. It simply boils down to a matter of opinion.
I wish Dr. Mark Hewitt every success with his latest book, and am certain it will be a very clever and articulate presentation of Theodore Kaczynski as the Zodiac Killer, but without undeniable scientific corroboration linking an individual to the crimes, it will always remain a compelling case crafted by Dr. Mark Hewitt, until such a time.

Hunted: The Zodiac Murders - Revised Edition (The Zodiac Serial Killer Book 1)

37 Comments

Judith

10/1/2018 11:12:16 am

Want to see something creepy? Go to Google street view and follow toward the presidio. There is a foot path at the end which leads into the presidio.

Judith

10/1/2018 11:38:05 am

Sorry For Cherry Street. Head towards the Presidio. There is a loop at the end. Keep going between the parked cars, there is the foot path. It leads straight into the Presidio.

Richard

10/1/2018 12:22:24 pm

That is correct Judith, here is the view from the other side.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@37.7900175,-122.4575055,3a,60y,174.92h,89.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9PESvLAqAicOlUNegecQdQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I highly doubt this was noticeable at night, but if he had done any advanced planning, then quite possibly. If this path was there in 1969, it would certainly have been an option. It could certainly tell us how familiar or unfamiliar he was the exact layout of the area he escaped into. The fact he possibly entered the first thoroughfare at Spruce and bypassed this small footpath may indicate he knew the area to some extent but not intimately.

art

10/1/2018 01:16:24 pm

Mark Hewitt's first two books were quite good. Richard, you are spot-on in your analysis...unfortunately this latest 'exposed' book on TJK is disappointing for exactly the reasons you mention. Too much speculative and loose fitting of the evidence to match the theory.

Richard

10/1/2018 01:46:02 pm

So you've read the book already Art. If I was attempting to make one simple argument against Ted Kaczynski, I would say, why would a killer who didn't live in Vallejo, but in Berkeley, California, make a payphone call at Springs and Tuolumne 40 minutes after the BRS attack, from a phone booth only 10 minutes away. If I was a clever criminal not wanting to take any risks, I would make the call possibly half way between BRS and Berkeley. Ted Kaczynski had an IQ of 168, which is genius level. The payphone call by somebody who doesn't live in Vallejo is not a particularly clever move.
But I know how easy it is to swipe these arguments aside - by saying "it was a genius move, Ted was trying to centre the focus on Vallejo by hanging around to make the call". There are numerous rebuttals to my argument, hence no matter what argument you put to promote or dismiss Ted Kaczynski, there will always be a counter argument.
Even Mark would probably agree that it is doubtful he would admit that something was wrong in his book just a few days after releasing it. He has probably thought through the book comprehensively.
I believe Mark has contributed a lot to the Zodiac case, but the majority of opinions on the Zodiac case are personal and open to counter-argument. Whether most can be proved unequivocally is unlikely.

Judith

10/1/2018 02:05:24 pm

Ted is not the worst suspect. His DNA should be easily obtained.

Richard

10/1/2018 02:32:48 pm

They claim DNA has never been taken directly from Ted Kaczynski since his capture. In 2011 FBI agents investigating the Tylenol killings, unsolved for nearly 30 years, wanted Ted Kaczynski's DNA.
I understand they want it directly from him for 100% confirmation, but they effectively already have it.
"Even before federal agents searched Theodore Kaczynski's mountain cabin for evidence, DNA tests of saliva found on two letters had already linked him to the Unabomber, according to court documents.

Investigators had concluded that the genetic content of saliva on a postage stamp of a Unabomber letter last June was similar to DNA found on a letter Kaczynski sent to his brother, David, the documents show.An FBI investigation in the two months before agents searched the cabin and arrested Kaczynski on April 3 also found common phrases and misspellings between his writing and documents penned by the person blamed for killing three people and injuring 23 during an 18-year bombing spree."
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/495821/POSTAGE-STAMP-SALIVA-FIRST-LINK-TO-KACZYNSKI.html

Shawn

10/1/2018 07:09:13 pm

Ahhh...

The fatal mistake of naming a suspect in a book....

The temptation became irresistible in his third book

art

10/1/2018 08:03:45 pm

In Hewitt's latest book there is reference to DNA being obtained from one of TJK's unabomb packages. The book does not state if TJK routinely licked his unabomb stamps (as evidenced by presence of reasonable amounts of DNA). If he did lick them, this would be fairly strong circumstantial evidence against TJK being Z, since little if any DNA was ever obtained from the Z stamps.

Nobody

10/1/2018 09:36:33 pm

This is like bait set on a trap for a hungry mouse!

Providing honest reviews on books can become a stressful and pointless exercise, particularly if the author chooses to disagree with the comments and decides to post replies in defense of his book.

This never ends well. More often than not, in tears!

For this reason I will reserve comment on this book. Authors write books for all kinds of reasons, but in my opinion the naming of a suspect should not be considered if there is even the slightest doubt. Many authors choose to put their reputations on the line based on a string of circumstantial ideas, then they get all upset if readers begin to find holes.

That is about all I am prepared to say.

Tom1

10/2/2018 03:59:15 pm

A book review could be very complimentary of the work in question. A totally separate issue could be the accuracy of the claims of the author. A perfectly logical system can be built that leads to a false conclusion.

Nobody

10/2/2018 05:12:53 pm

Yes Tom. As far as I am concerned, if you're going to write a book on Zodiac, don't ever have a suspect unless you are 100% sure, and don't ever try to solve the ciphers unless you are 100% sure, or you will regret it. The problem is of course when people become 100% convinced about things in their own mind, or even 99% convinced, when they are really only about 30% sure or less. They often cannot be told the truth, which can become a problem in itself.

This author may turn out to be 100% correct if DNA ever makes a conclusive match. But until that day comes, his conclusions are little more than an educated opinion based on circumstantial evidence and a chain of selective reasoning.

The problem with selective reasoning is it tends to discount other possibilities. Authors frequently lead themselves astray. Taken to its extreme, a real life comedy of errors can result. The author becomes like a bloodhound that has somewhere along the road taken a wrong turn and ended up following a false trail. I see it all the time with cipher solutions and suspects. But what can you do? People will be people. They will never learn.

What you say is very true. An author can begin on a solid foundation and even present a very good background to the case as a whole. It is only that they have made some fundamental errors in judgement at some point and this has led them to the wrong conclusion, even though that conclusion may be presented in a way that seems entirely plausible.

But who am I to talk? I am nobody so I have no ego and my advice is therefore meaningless. :)

Richard

10/2/2018 02:28:11 am

If Mark Hewitt ever reads these comments, I would like to ask two fair questions. I may be mistaken, but in his Napa Bookstore interviews I recollect Mark saying that he didn't believe Arthur Leigh Allen was Zodiac based on comparison to handwriting and fingerprints (among others), but in his latest interviews the fingerprint evidence is questioned as not necessarily being donated by the killer. Maybe somebody can help me here, but the Napa videos have curiously disappeared from any search on Youtube. Is this because they contradict his latest findings and therefore were removed by Mark, or is there an altogether different reason. If anybody could find these videos it would help me clarify.
The second observation is an Opperman podcast published September 15th 2017 where Mark states "Handwriting also eliminated Arthur Leigh Allen, the police took numerous examples of both left hand and right hand work of Arthur Leigh Allen, but nothing conclusively said ALA was the writer of the letters."
Taken at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0paKplKY-kA
26 minutes 14 seconds in.
On his PROFILED podcast dated 9 months ago, therefore January 2018, approximately 4 months after the Opperman podcast, Mark stated "SFPD went around trying to eliminate people on the fingerprints, they may have been using incorrect fingerprints to eliminate people when they should not have been eliminated. They did the other thing with handwriting. They're not certain the Zodiac handwriting is actually his, and there's a lot of reason to believe its not. Based on the fact the handwriting that the killer used is so distinctive and so messy and so child-like that anybody who had used that handwriting in daily life, they would have been noticed in the first months or years of the Zodiac case. A lot of the letters were published in the paper so that people could see the handwriting and say 'Oh that reminds me of my Uncle John's handwriting because it's so distinctive, that he would have been nailed fairly quickly. So, that gives me the idea that somehow he may have been involved in faking his handwriting."
11 minutes into
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/dan-zupansky1/2017/12/07/the-zodiac-profiled-mark-hewitt

The problem here is you cannot maintain Arthur Leigh Allen was eliminated by handwriting from his left or right hand, while also believing Zodiac disguised his handwriting. Because if Arthur Leigh Allen was Zodiac, he would have disguised his handwriting, and therefore taking samples from his left and right hand are meaningless by extension. Maybe Mark has changed his views in the meantime, but if your suspect is Theodore Kaczynski, then it is in your interest to negate the validity of fingerprints collected because they have Theodore Kaczynski's fingerprints on file which could effectively eliminate him. Also, if Mark believes the Exorcist letter is genuine, then we have the palm print to explain away. By such time, they should have learnt not to handle the letters, under instruction from the police. They certainly could have eliminated any Chronicle staff by asking and checking their palm print as the possible donor.
I assume by the above therefore, that Mark doesn't believe the Zodiac writing matches with Kaczynski because he believes the Zodiac writing has been disguised. He certainly couldn't claim a Zodiac/Kaczynski similarity in handwriting as favourable to his case, because he has already made a case for the Zodiac writing being disguised. I hopefully am not nitpicking (which is easy to do). But a resolution to these questions would be helpful.

Nobody

10/2/2018 03:27:22 am

Richard, you raise some very valid questions there. The way I see it, most things in this modern world can be compared to food. There is fast food and there is healthy food. One is extremely biased, the other extremely well balanced. One is designed to help you in the short term the other for the long term. Both have consequences, one good the other not so good. But which is often the most popular? That's right, the one that is MOST CONVENIENT.

I have already said too much.

Judith

10/2/2018 07:15:06 am

It is my opinion that there are no Zodiac fingerprints. Zodiac has made it clear that he covers his fingertips in two coats of model airplane glue, try it. My suspect demonstrated this for me on more than one occasion. Zodiac did not leave any fingerprints. To eliminate suspects based on fingerprints is a waste of time. Zodiac was fully aware of police procedures. This case will be solved through DNA.

Nobody

10/2/2018 04:43:55 pm

Judith you may be right about the airplane cement. The finger prints pertaining to the Zodiac case are really bad. The lack of any clarity does suggest he had something on his finger tips, and airplane cement is a definite possibility.

However I am quite certain that lovely big palm print that was left on the phone was indeed from the Zodiac. It was perhaps the best print they ever obtained, but it apparently has not matched with any of the suspects they investigated closely.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/discus/messages/19/934.html?1169913448

Rubislaw 32 link

10/2/2018 01:14:34 pm

Mark Hewitt,is peerless in articulating a documentation of the reign of the Zodiac 1968-1974.

In addition,one senses that he could turn his hand to writing a book about most aspects to this phenomenon,at the drop of a hat.He makes it look easy.

One shortcoming,like his ''very capable'' contemporaries,Mr.Morford and Mr,Butterfied,is that he does not possess a sense of understanding with Zodiac's cipher work.A further side to the Zodiac,is therefore,to an extent,lost.

With Hewitt's third book,his trilogy is now complete,and,because of the quality of his writing,and his research,will serve as quality reference material,in the future.

I think well of Mark Hewitt.In my early days of coming to terms with this serial killer,he allocated time for me,and gave me solid and prudent advice.

Hewitt had two rules of thumb.Firstly,stick to that which is substantiated.Secondly,never adopt a pet suspect.

So,it may be a surprise to some,that he has broken his second rule of thumb [!].And,I am not entirely convinced that Hewitt is entirely convinced,by his adopted suspect,''Ted K''.

''Ted K'' was an exceptionally gifted mathematician,who had the opportunity to do great things,in his field.Sadly,''other matters'' took his attention.

''Ted K'' suffered from Asperger's syndrome,a mild form of autism.

He therefore only read and wrote the written word,literally.No sense of nuance nor irony.And,certainly no humour.

In effect,little understanding or ability to enact ''charm'',either naturally or by design.

And,this is certainly not ''The Zodiac'' that we see,in the correspondence material.

In addition,''Ted K'' was an ''arm's length'' killer.The Zodiac's capacity for close-up bloody and gory ''glory'',all too self-evident.

Perhaps,Mr.Hewitt has had to succumb,to his publisher's wishes [?].

A pity.

But,in this particular genre,who can honestly say that there is anyone better,than.....Mark Hewitt.

Judith

10/2/2018 02:58:16 pm

Agreed Rubi. Killing from afar. His handwriting is interesting in comparison. Zodiac had irony and sarcasm.

Tommy S

10/2/2018 03:56:12 pm

When I saw that he was trying to sell signed copies of one of his earlier books for 85 dollars, his motivation in writing the books and naming a suspect became clearer🤑

Rubislaw 32 link

10/2/2018 03:58:33 pm

Yes,the handwriting,Judith,but more specifically its composition.

One afternoon,a couple of years ago,I decided that I was going to access,any available writing material,on ''Ted K''.

What was all the fuss about,related to the Zodiac ? We all knew that Kaczynski was considered a genius.

Well,I was quite shocked,from disappointment.And,his moral and political stances on,what he called ''Anti-Industrialization'' were neither convincing,nor earnest.Not least,remarkable or unique.

I felt that the only side that Kaczynski and the Zodiac,had in common,was that they were both ''Malanthropes''....desiring to promote the desolation in others.

But,this would not be an unusual trait,in many serial killers,anyway [?].

Perhaps the Asperger's syndrome does project a ''coldness'' that betrays,problems inside,for which most of us,could concede sympathy [?].

With the Zodiac,I find myself thinking : ''If only you could put aside your anger,and sharpen up your exterior image,you might actually be quite likeable.''.

Naturally though,''Serial Killing'' is the personification of moral anarchy,in a civilised society.And,can never be condoned.

Kaczynski and the Zodiac,take note.

Judith

10/2/2018 10:09:59 pm

Well my suspect had a very charming and lovable personality living inside of him.Very humorous, loud like a comedian. He could make the whole room laugh.He would enter a room and come over and do a handstand on my knees.
You couldn't help but love him. Many of his childhood friends were still very dear to him. There were many times people came to our home to seek his advice and wisdom.
There was another personality living inside of there too. Here's a little trip you can take. View the film Taxi Driver with Robert De Niro, that's the other side of Peter. Cape Fear with Robert De Niro, that's the other side of Peter. So scary.
My guess is that Peter had more charm in his little finger than Ted Kaczynski had in his whole body.

I have held the hand of the devil, it was warm in the night.

Rubislaw 32 link

10/3/2018 04:20:29 am

Peter seems fascinating ''case material'',Judith,for want of any better expression.

Unless,so called experts ourselves,we have to observe what those,that take an interest,have to say....and,I shall make a point of what David Van Nuys comments,in ''Into the mind of a serial killer'',again.

At the very least,I think that the Zodiac was bipolar [...a manic depressive...],and ''very bright''.

This ''genius'' business is endlessly interesting....to try to fathom,what extra these few individuals possess,beyond us ''mere mortals''.

Von Neuman [matematician],Oppenheimer[physicist],and Chamberlain[politician]....all could speak at least 12 foreign languages fluently.

Top spots,in the genius stakes,seem to be reserved for the ''Natural Philosopher'',which embodies both mathematics and physics.

But,like all humans,the genius has his weaknesses.Newton wasted 12 of his best years,messing about with Alchemy,and produced nothing.Einstein never travelled on public transport,preferring to walk everywhere.The reason ? He struggled to make the most basic mental arithmetic calculations,and concerned himself that he would hold up fellow passengers,with his inability to find the correct fare.

I have heard that ''Ted K'' writes about 400 letters a year,and will probably reply to anyone caring to write to him.Why doesn't he go back to mathematics [?]....is the only question I would wish to ask him.

The chances of him being the Zodiac,must be based mostly on geographic time line.But even then,Richard makes a good case,for some of the Zodiac's ''Vallejo'' behaviour,with ''Ted K'' a Berkeley resident,at the time.

Rubislaw 32 link

10/3/2018 04:33:40 am

.....that was pure coincidence,that I mentioned Chamberlain and Oppenheimer....the first,who started WW2.....and,the second,that ended it.

Rubislaw 32 link

10/3/2018 05:09:26 am

World War Two ?

Another of Rubislaw 32's ''clews'',as to the identity of the Zodiac.

Now,I'm being very very naughty,and really must stop it.

Nobody

10/3/2018 04:49:30 pm

The 1960s was the birth place of a new phenomenon known as the Eco-terrorist. I have read Ted K's Manifesto and I must say it is a very good summary of everything that is wrong with our modern world, albeit from a 1960s perspective. In many ways Ted K was ahead of his time with his thinking, at least at this point in his career. But of course many other people around that time were also beginning to question the morality of a highly industrialized world, for example Sandra Good and Lynette Fromme, and their ideas eventually came together as ATWA. The difference is that Ted K's ideas were much more academic (legitimately sourced) and logically formulated. ATWA's ideology had as its source the often insane ramblings of a drug-fueled prophet. The lunacy of both Ted K and ATWA comes in the way these people chose to right the wrongs of the perceived evils that surrounded them. How anyone can justify the killing of innocent people in order to make the world a better place is lunacy enough, but believing that a few single acts of terror and murder can alter human consciousness enough to bring about a revolution in thinking is just plain delusional. Ted K killed from afar by sending out bombs. Manson killed from afar by sending out his brainwashed minions.

As for the Zodiac, I see no clear evidence in his writings of a concern about the world or the environment. He spends a lot of time in fact ranting about killing people. In fact the act of killing seems to be his only real concern and motivation, although at times he asks for media attention and the correct reporting of his misdeeds. Otherwise he says he might do his "thing" (i.e. kill people). There is no great manifesto of reasoning behind what he did. Where is the genius in that? I really do not see it. He managed to create a simple homophonic cipher probably by following examples in a code book he stole from a library, followed by a fake one. He then made some very juvenile attempts to impress us with ciphers which were far too small to ever decipher. This was just plain bad cryptography and speaks volumes about how little he actually knew about the subject, or was his intention merely to torment us with little riddles that have no real meaning anyway? As a serial killer I would have to say the Zodiac was probably the least interesting of them all. People generally do not like egotistical braggarts, so why should the Zodiac be so popular? The truly amazing thing is that he managed to evade capture, more by sheer luck than any grand design on his part. The crazy thing is that Manson almost escaped detection and it was only a chance discovery on the part of the police which instantly placed his gang in the spotlight for the murders. Many aspects of the Manson case were bungled and the trial later became a media circus. In such an environment it should hardly surprise any of us that the Zodiac managed to escape detection for so long. He was really just the pathetic serial killer who got away with it.

Nobody

10/3/2018 05:22:16 pm

One minor clarification to the above. Ted K's Manifesto was sent June, 1995. It was therefore not 1960s era. But it is highly reflective of the ideology of that era. Ted K dropped out of academia in 1969 to live the life of a hermit in them there hills. He was not the only one to drop out of society in 1969!

Tom1

10/4/2018 02:52:21 pm

Academic does not equate in any way to legitimately sourced.

Nobody

10/4/2018 03:23:12 pm

You are correct. I realized that myself after posting the above but of course there is no "edit" function for users on this blog and I could no0t be bothered posting a second clarification. Cheers.

Judith

10/3/2018 06:52:32 pm

Peter would frequently say, "Charlie Manson...is a pimple on my ass."

Nobody

10/3/2018 09:43:59 pm

Hi Judith, Did Peter know Manson personally, or was Manson just someone he read about on the news but really could not give a damn about? I gather by what you say he thought of Manson as an amateur idiot who was all too easily popped?

In many ways I see Manson and his gang were trying to glom on to the Zodiac persona. There is ample evidence that they admired the Zodiac and tried to copycat, but their efforts were a bit like the preschoolers trying to imitate the fifth graders.

If you think Peter was responsible for the Lake Berryessa attack on Bryan and Cecelia, what do you think he would have been wearing under the costume? Bryan described the man who attacked them as being of generally sloppy appearance, and very "low class" in all respects. This is interesting to me, as it suggests his assailant was wearing some old-looking, possibly worn out clothes beneath a costume that he had otherwise spent a long time constructing. So why wear rough and disheveled clothes under a fresh new masterpiece?

Judith

10/4/2018 07:08:16 am

Peter and his father were blue collar working class men. They belonged to trade unions in the Bay Area. He actually made fun of people who had a college education. They would sit around and joke about "college boys". "Pencil pushers". When he had inherited money after his parents deaths, he continued to wear raggedy wore out clothing with holes in the elbows. He drove a truck our entire marriage that was so beat up that it was embarrassing to me. It is also my belief that he padded his outfits when he was killing to make himself appear beefier and larger than he actually was.

Nobody

10/4/2018 03:48:48 pm

Thanks Judith

N/A

10/4/2018 10:29:33 am

The problem with Ted Kaczynski being Zodiac is that Ted had a full head of hair. Donald Fouke said Zodiac's hair was all receding and graying which should eliminate him based on that fact. Same goes for people like Larry Kane.

Judith

10/4/2018 11:21:15 am

There is no way to confirm that the man Fouke saw was the killer. Please stick to eyewitness accounts.

N/A

10/4/2018 02:11:17 pm

Judith, are you saying the 3 kids were not witnesses? They are responsible along with Don Fouke for the drawing. I guess you believe Zodiac didn't write that he was stopped by a cop either?

Nobody

10/4/2018 03:42:23 pm

Please know, I am not the same poster as N/A!

There were actually three distinctly different sketches drawn from the eye-witness accounts at Lake Berryessa, not one. I have also noted a re-drawn sketch of the best of the three sketches, but have never been able to ascertain if this sketch was "improved" by the original sketch artist or by someone on the internet. We regularly find "re-workings" of the original sketches online, due to people who are trying to match up the sketches with their pet suspects.

As for Larry Kane and Ted K not matching the sketches, that is difficult to say. We would really have to find sketches that could be dated to the same times that the crimes took place. The Lake Berryessa sketches show a person with a full head of hair, unlike the sketch made of the person leaving the Stine scene, which suggests either a crew cut or receding hair. The person seen by police "lumbering" along the footpath may not have been the Zodiac! It was a big city. This could have been another man who heard the gunshots nearby and was trying to get home as fast as possible. Why do we have no way of knowing if he had anything to do with the murder of Paul Stine? Because the cops failed to stop him and question him. So we can never know for certain. Likewise we can never know for certain if the pervert who was loitering about and acting suspiciously was the Zodiac. A lot of people visit that lake, even in those times. He could have been anybody.

Nobody

10/4/2018 03:50:31 pm

Correction: We would really have to find photos that could be dated to the same times that the crimes took place.

DR. MARK HEWITT - A KILLER EXPOSED

Leave a Reply.