THE CONFIRMATION LETTER

11/16/2017

Inspired by the first episode of the Zodiac Killer docudrama, which aired on November 14th 2017, we will take a completely fresh look at the Cheri Jo Bates murder using only newspaper and magazine articles as our guide, and completely disregard anything contained in the material provided by Robert Graysmith. It will also disregard any preconceptions of the crime formulated by investigators and the 'Confession' letter sent on November 29th 1966, approximately one month after the brutal murder.

The 'Confession' letter author likely played into the suppositions of investigators, who almost immediately ran with the narrative that Cheri Jo Bates had her Volkswagen Beetle tampered with while she was in the library, despite the fact little supports this conclusion. Let us start in and around the library annex just before opening time.

The 'Inside Detective' magazine recalled that a Mexican-American student noticed Cheri Jo Bates close to opening time and shortly after - who stated 'he knew Cheri Jo Bates and had noticed her in the library the night in question. He said he saw the girl "writing something with a ball point pen" in her blue spiral school notebook." The boy told us he was outside about 5:30 pm, waiting for the library to open at 6, and it was then he saw the girl.' It clearly states he had 'noticed her in the library the night in question' - therefore presumably after 6:00 pm.

The 'Inside Detective' Magazine also stated "The participants in the reenactment at the detectives' request, wore the same clothing and sat in the same seats that they had occupied the Sunday night of the murder. They were also asked to park their cars in the same places they had on the night of October 30. It had been determined that Cheri Jo (or a girl resembling her and in similar clothes) had arrived at the library about 5:40 pm and waited for about 20 minutes for the doors to be opened. The girl apparently entered the library as soon as the doors were opened at 6.00 pm, and checked out the books she had come for".

Taking this completely at face value, and the fact her library books were discovered on the passenger side seat of her vehicle, we will assume she entered the library at opening time and discharged her reading material. Sergeant Gren stated "The girl was definitely in the library as she checked out the books. She must have been contacted by the murderer as soon as she received her books". The key words here, are she "checked out her books". The article continued "However, other students who were acquainted with Cheri Jo said they were in the library between 6:30 and 6:40 pm- and did not see the girl during that time." Neither did Walter Siebert, who stated that "he and a few friends were in the library from 7:15 pm until 9, but did not see Miss Bates, whom they all knew. They said they saw four men dressed in work clothes sitting on a fence across from the spot where Miss Bates' car was found, but they did not know them".

It is therefore extremely likely Cheri Jo Bates entered the library at 6:00 pm and left before 6:30 pm, having checked out her books. The four men in work clothes are crucial. They stated to investigators that "they had seen Cheri Jo near her car the previous night". But what time and where? It is reasonable to assume it may have been slightly before 5:30 pm, since the Mexican-American student and the female eyewitness saw Cheri Jo Bates at 5:30 pm, 5:40 pm and the time she entered the library at 6:00 pm.

The Riverside City College was undergoing renovation at the time, so these four men may have been passing the area of the college campus around this time - probably working within the college campus on a Sunday, at a time when certain areas were free from student activity. This may be a reasonable supposition, because they were still in the vicinity when Walter Siebert arrived at 7:15 pm, at which time they were sitting on a fence on the north side of Terracina Drive. They may have been taking a break. Walter Siebert and friends never laid eyes on Cheri Jo Bates that evening, nor did they, or any other person familiar with the young girl, spot her striking lime green Volkswagen Beetle (or at the very least was it wasn't reported), despite the fact it was supposedly parked only 30 yards or 90 feet east of the library entrance. Walter Siebert and friends said "they saw four men dressed in work clothes sitting on a fence across from the spot where Miss Bates' car was found, but they did not know them". Walter Siebert only said the four men were located across from the position the vehicle "was found", not from the position of the vehicle that evening. Indicating they never saw her vehicle on the evening of October 30th 1966. In fact, not one of the attendees to the library that evening or night stated they spotted Cheri Jo Bates' vehicle in the position it was found. "They were also asked to park their cars in the same places they had on the night of October 30", yet apparently not one parked near the lime green Volkswagen Beetle, or noted its position on Terracina Drive.

Is it possible they didn't notice her vehicle because it wasn't there? Cheri Jo Bates parked her vehicle up that evening, and was noticed by the four men (but not necessarily exactly 30 yards east of the library), who said "they had seen Cheri Jo near her car the previous night". She then entered the library, "checked out her books," left before 6:30 pm and possibly drove away, bucking the supposition of detectives, who assumed the perpetrator disabled her vehicle while she was in the library, and wrongly concluded her vehicle remained idle from the moment she parked up, to the following morning when her vehicle was ultimately discovered.

A perpetrator disabling her vehicle, would had to have done so approximately 90 feet from the library entrance, risking being spotted and then killed her within minutes, despite the fact the young woman's body would have lain in the alleyway for around 4 hours that evening, without anybody walking down the alleyway, and completely negating the screams being heard around 10:30 pm by at least two earwitnesses. It makes little sense, and therefore is highly unlikely.

This is why the 'Confession' letter is highly suspect. It is simply parroting what investigators immediately concluded after discovering the disabled Volkswagen Beetle, and what was widely reported in the newspapers in the aftermath of the murder. The 'Confession' letter revealed no details only privy to the murderer - and even if its author was the killer of Cheri Jo Bates, he was only too happy to concur with the conclusions of the police investigation, especially if it steered the investigators away from what really happened on October 30th 1966, and even more importantly, centered the focus around the library annex and college campus. The 'Confession' letter should have been called the 'Confirmation' letter, as it effectively confirmed to police what they already believed, whereas the truth likely lay elsewhere.

The 'Inside Detective' magazine also stated 'Two young girls who said they knew Cheri Jo, gave a taped interview to a crew from a Los Angeles television station. The girls in the interview, said that Cheri Jo had told them Sunday that she was "going to the library to meet her boyfriend." However, Sgt Gren said that while Cheri Jo had met her boyfriend in San Francisco the weekend prior to her murder, the boy was still in the Bay Area at the time of her death. The statements of the two girls were based on hearsay and not on fact Captain Cross told newsmen". It is clear this statement was prematurely dismissed by police, because according to the two girls, Cheri Jo Bates was supposedly "going to the library to meet her boyfriend". This cannot be misinterpreted as going to San Francisco to meet her boyfriend Dennis Highland, unless she was meeting him at a library in San Francisco.

This is from Zodiackiller.com: "The relationship between Barnett and Cheri soured after Cheri returned from San Francisco, where she had visited her steady boyfriend. Cheri informed Barnett that she had accepted this boyfriend's wedding proposal and that she and Barnett could no longer date. (This conversation with Barnett occurred less than a week before her murder)". It is clear that the relationships of Cheri Jo Bates were less than clear cut, so it is by no means out of the question that Cheri Jo Bates may have made alternative plans that Sunday evening, once her friend Stephanie Guttmann declined her officer at 3:45 pm that day, to accompany her to the library. Cheri Jo Bates may have originally planned to meet a "boyfriend" after the library closed that evening, but her plans could have changed when Stephanie decided not to go to the library.

Cheri Jo Bates was spotted near her vehicle by the four workmen just before 5:30 pm. We don't know where exactly she parked. The men may simply have walked past her somewhere near the college, and noticed her alongside the vehicle. It may have been in the near area it was eventually found. This would make sense, because investigators presumably asked the four men where they spotted Cheri Jo Bates and her vehicle, and it likely near concurred with the position of the vehicle the following morning, thereby not raising any red flags.

Later, Walter Siebert and friends noticed the same four men sitting on a fence, likely taking a break, around 7:15 pm, but they didn't notice Cheri Jo Bates or her vehicle. Therefore, it is unlikely the four men spotted Cheri Jo Bates alongside her vehicle at 7:15 pm, because if they had, Walter Siebert and friends would likely have noticed her and the Volkswagen Beetle too, which they didn't. Additionally, if investigators tied the two stories together, and assumed the four men noticed Cheri Jo Bates by her vehicle at 7:15 pm, then she would have supposedly been leaving the library. Had she been arriving at the library, then Walter Siebert and friends would have seen her in the library between 7:15 pm and 9:00 pm. But she couldn't have been leaving the library either, because Cheri Jo Bates had apparently entered at opening time and wasn't even spotted in the library between 6:30 pm and 6:40 pm,

If Cheri Jo Bates checked out her books prior to 6:30 pm, why would she still be next to her vehicle at 7:15 pm. Had it been tampered with while in the library, she could have simply sought assistance inside the library or from her arriving friends. The whole scenario doesn't stack up. The four men must have spotted Cheri Jo Bates on her arrival to the library just before 5:30 pm and relayed this to police, that "they had seen Cheri Jo near her car the previous night". At 7:15 pm, when the four men were spotted by Walter Siebert, Cheri Jo Bates and her vehicle were gone. Investigators likely assumed Cheri Jo Bates' vehicle remained throughout, as they had done from the very beginning, and the vehicle simply went unnoticed by Walter Siebert and company.

Originally her plans were to visit the library to study with Stephanie Guttmann, but possibly her plans changed and she decided to meet with this "boyfriend". The eventual murder had all the hallmarks of a spurned admirer and 'crime of passion'.
The problem we have, is why would Cheri Jo Bates' vehicle have left the library and returned to effectively the same position some 4 hours later. Had she arranged to meet the 'mystery man' outside the library just after checking her books out, gone to a secondary location, before returning her 'passenger' where she picked him up. If so, did he live nearby and was familiar with the college campus, including the two empty houses along the alleyway. The fact that both windows were rolled down, with the keys in the ignition and doors unlocked, may suggest something erupted on their arrival back at the library. If he is carrying her books for her, the 'mystery man' may have exited the vehicle, placed the books on the seat, closed the right door, inadvertently leaving it slightly ajar, and then proceeded to disable her vehicle in the heat of the moment to prevent her leaving. This may explain her eagerness to vacate the vehicle and seek help. She is dragged into the alleyway, and the attack begins circa 10:30 pm. The author of the 'Confession' letter, if the killer, knew that by playing into the police narrative of the crime, the investigation would remain squarely around the college campus and make his confession completely worthwhile.

28 Comments

Carl Karas

11/16/2017 03:56:02 pm

Yes it seems very plausible that they had an argument upon returning from a date in the VW and the killer then disables the car...pulls her into the dark alley and off the lit street. You're tying up a lot of loose ends here, Richard. Great work. The letter disguising the fact that he knew her.

Richard

11/17/2017 06:47:31 am

If you were to plan a murder in advance Carl, do you reckon you would arm yourself with a proper knife or a knife described by police as a pocket knife with a 3 inch blade or less. In an area such as where the murder took place, I imagine time is of the essence. This attack can hardly be described as well thought out. Certainly not clinical, based on the number of defensive wounds CJB had on her hands and arms. This to me was a murder of rage- impulsive if you will.

Ray Jenkins

11/18/2017 04:43:04 pm

I tend to agree, but then again serial killers often do kill as if impulsively and in a rage. But perhaps, just perhaps, this was his first kill? He only then discovered he had a taste for it and would extend the blame for killing Cheri Jo into a sense of misplaced revenge against society in general. The Zodiac frequently tried to twist the blame for his actions on to the police and the media and the general public. He often said he would continue to kill BECAUSE they would not stop fiddling and farting around. He killed because they would not catch him and help him. He said he killed because parents allowed their daughters to roam free at night. It was because the media would not publish his letters. It was because the public would not wear his buttons. etc. etc. etc. It was never his fault entirely, and even when it was it was because he required slaves for his afterlife. We see this sense of misplaced blame used over and over by the Zodiac, and I suspect this was not so much a taunt as the Zodiac truly believing this was the case. He felt compelled to kill and truly believed the lack of public understanding for his condition was what drove him and made him an innocent victim of his own crimes. This is a very twisted way of thinking, but not unusual for a psychopath. In the Zodiac's case, this kind of twisted thinking nagged at him and to some extent egged him on. Serial killers are seldom logical in what they do. Even when we try to profile them by pigeon holing things like modus operandi, we inevitably find exceptions. The Zodiac's brain was wired all over the place, as we can tell from his writings, so it is not surprising that the locations and MOs of his crimes should reflect this incredibly erratic variation.

Greg

11/16/2017 07:18:03 pm

You guys ever hear of Bud Kelley as a CJB suspect? He was one of the cops in charge of her murder investigation. He went away to prison for life a few years ago for child abuse. Tom Voigt put up a podcast on his website a few days ago saying Kelley is his number 1 suspect. Said he had talked to the guy years ago and describes him as a really vile, nasty man. Kelley, he says, was stuck on Bob Barnett to draw attention away from himself.

Rubislaw 32 link

11/16/2017 11:16:03 pm

It always seems to happen,in a long drawn out cold case,with no arrests on the horizon,nor definitive suspects.....blame a cop [!].

Recently,some rumination over Hoffman,over Darlene Ferrin....Palombo,over Joan Webster.....and now Kelley,over Cheri Jo Bates.

Agatha Christie was the first crime writer to come up with the idea of ''It was the policeman,that dunnit.''

Of,course,we are all just ruminating here....but on balance,the notion is actually ''close to'' ridiculous [?].

But,this idea of a male acquaintance,who thought that his luck was in....then realising that he was actually getting the brush off.....''is'' very persuasive.

How often do we see it happen ? Often.

And those male individuals that find it difficult befriending a fellow male,much less the opposite sex,are going to take a brush off,that more personal.

And,if they are actually psychopaths.....well,the sky's the limit.

Ray Jenkins

11/17/2017 06:31:16 pm

Yes indeed, the old "brush off" can really tear at the emotions and heart strings of a young man. Unrequited love is probably much more commonplace than "true" love. I must admit as a much younger man, the first time this happened I took it rather hard. But then I got use to the "brush offs", as well as the oft-repeated line "I think we should just be friends". This is all just a part of growing up and finding the right person. Later in life, most people look back on such past events and, in good humour, consider themselves lucky to have avoided most of those bombshells.

I can well understand that for a young girl, her efforts at being nice may be construed incorrectly by a suitor as "leading him on". Eventually things may reach crisis point, where she starts to tire of his obsessiveness and has to be blunt with him about her feelings. Then when he persists further, she has to get angry and perhaps scared and tries to find ways to block out his advances. Often the only people who are aware of the relationship problem are the two people involved. Still it is a wonder that Cheri's friends would have at least seen the two individuals together at some time.

This makes me wonder if her killer was a total coward, always lurking in the background quietly, who nobody would have ever expected. He may well have been psychopathic and stalking Cheri Jo secretly. Perhaps he was not capable of talking to women, let alone forming a meaningful relationship. He may have considered her out of his league, but also constantly fantasized about her. Then one day he may have seen her holding hands or kissing another boy. This sent him into a private rage and he snapped. He decided that she had to pay for her "betrayal" and for failing to notice him. This is definitely a plausible scenario.

Rubislaw 32 link

11/18/2017 03:20:16 am

This ''brush off'' theory becomes more and more persuasive.

And,further to your comments,Ray,the ''scenario'' where this ''person'' is a mature student,with a motorcar,believing himself to be portrayed as a worldly and wise guy,compared to most of his male students.

Why wouldn't a beautiful young woman,like Cheri Jo,not be attracted to the image,that he has created,for himself ? [....so,he believes...].

And,then he gets a whiff of rejection....the psychopath in meltdown [?].

Greg

11/17/2017 01:02:17 am

Good points Rubislaw. I guess what makes Kelley stand apart is that he got busted on serious charges of child molestation in 2011 and will spend the rest of his days in prison. If this man is of such a vile character it makes one wonder about his integrity in handling the Bates case. I knew nothing about him prior to Voigt bringing his name up in the podcast. Bates was stabbed 42 times, so it appears to be a crime of passion committed by someone she knew who had a personal vendetta. Understandable I suppose why they have remained fixated on her spurned boyfriend "Bob Barnett"...I guess we'll probably never learn his real identity until he leaves this world, if even then...

monarch link

11/17/2017 09:58:32 pm

Greg, "Bob Barnett's" real name isn't a big secret, I'll give you a hint (since I don't know if I should blurt out his real name on this web site) "Bob Barnett" went to high school with Cheri and was in her graduating class of 1966 at Ramona High,his real initials are BB, his first name is Bill,his high school year book photo is near Cheri's photo (because both their last names start with the letter B) the Ramona high 1966 year book can be viewed on www.classmates.com

Greg

11/18/2017 09:36:39 pm

Thanks monarch. Had a look but there are at least 4 different Bills with a B a surname. Feel free to email me the name, I'm curious to know who he is: solitarystar6@aol.com ..Thanks, Greg

Greg

11/18/2017 09:55:51 pm

Monarch, if the first three letters of "Bob Barnett's" actual surname are Bea, just reply with the word "beautiful" and we'll considered it settled. :)

Rubislaw 32 link

11/17/2017 01:42:19 am

Yes,I take your point also,Greg.

As in any walk of life,there are good,bad and indifferent policemen.

But I can attest,having spoken to detectives,off the record,that a high profile case is every detectives dream and ambition.The chances of one,who is actually involved in such a case,being the perpetrator,is near zero....with everyone concerned being on ''high awareness''.

Paedophilia is a sad fact of life,but all those ''afflicted'' have the opportunity to simply obey the law.The rest of us must just be mindful of our responsibility to protect minors.

Indeed,there are,at least,suggestions of a ''crime passional'' with the Bates case.

I am persuaded,on balance,that the letter of confession ''is'' Zodiac.One must bear in mind,that gifted and experienced Document Examiners,like Sherwood Morrill,were not just about assessing work by a crafted hand....and he was as confident about the type written ''confession'',as the rest of the related correspondence.

As time goes on,my feelings are that Cheri Jo's killer probably was ''Zodiac'',also.Maybe,the Riverside Police just called it ''plain wrong'' [?].

Joan Webster's [November 1981] parents received similar correspondence,to Joseph Bates.....but it is just that we,the public,have not been privy to any of it.From what I know about her case,it is looking increasingly likely that this was ''Zodiac'',also.

If only Gareth Penn,hadn't been daft enough to blame Michael O'Hare,his highlighting of that case,might have had as much impetus,as Paul Avery's,on Cheri Jo.

But,I remain confident that the Zodiac case,as a whole,will be resolved,in some form....and we will receive more answers.

Richard

11/17/2017 02:37:56 am

Here's a great link from Gregory, Rubislaw.

http://www.tagtele.com/videos/voir/247686/

Rubislaw 32 link

11/17/2017 08:41:53 am

Many thanks for the link,Richard and Gregory.

Funnily enough,I have corresponded with Klaus Schmeh,in the past....who is a gentleman,and passionate ''crypto'' journalist.Sadly,he seems to be under the impression that a certain member of ''The Code Team'' is a ''Zodiac expert''.

Now really....as I have emphasised this time and time again....there is no such thing as a ''Zodiac expert''....and if there was,it would be to describe someone who is expert in failing to solve the case of The Zodiac Killer.

So,I am inclined to believe that Klaus is having the wool pulled down,over his eyes by a ''Code Team'' that excels only,in self fawning platitudes [?].

''The Code Team'',as should be pointed out,were employed to ''playact'' code breaking.And,were probably deemed a better choice of ''role play'' than hiring actual actors,whose appearance fees would be considerably more expensive.

Coming back down to earth,I am entirely confident that I have solved all remaining high profile Zodiac cryptograms,including the ''340''.

What peeves me is to see this spreading of inaccuracies and disinformation.I see that the ''Code Team'' are already gaining mentions in some major newspapers.....for what [?],if not mere ''simulation''.

Last year,I personally became involved in the ''Police Scotland Spying Scandal''....which is not unrelated to The Zodiac case....though to what extent,I am unwilling to divulge.My patience is running thin,and,other than writing a letter of complaint to Mr.Trump,my options are narrowing down to feathering my bed with a major newspaper.

At that point,''everything'' would be passed on,though I would try to avoid undermining ''true'' LE investigation.

But naturally,certain individuals might receive a ''dishonorable'' mention,as a matter of course....even if it not likely to be ''in the public interest''.

In surveying the Zodiac website ''landscape'',there are very few individuals,truly worthy of the term ''expert''.....but I would certainly place you,Richard,in that hallowed category.

What the ''self fawners'' fail to understand,are the magic ingredients :

Passion and Commitment.

Ray Jenkins

11/17/2017 05:59:05 pm

The fact that people say they didn't see somebody is neither here nor there. Many people walk around, totally wrapped up in their own little worlds, and totally oblivious to what is going on around them.

I have been to functions at times and although there were only 20-30 people or so in attendance, I will meet up with colleagues at a later date who will ask why I had not attended the event. When I reply that I was there, they will say "Well we didn't see you there!" The simple fact of the matter is people often take little notice of their surroundings, particularly in the everyday, routine world.

One time I purchased things at a supermarket, then on getting to the car I realized I had left behind my credit card. The girl on the checkout had no recollection of me having just been through her checkout. So I showed her the receipt which had her name and the time and date. She could not argue with that, but still she replied that she could not remember me.

I suspect that even a busy librarian could miss seeing someone, being primarily focused on her job, the books and stamping cards, among other duties.

And how many times can we walk past someone in the street without noticing them unless they see us and say something?

The fact is people can sometimes be "invisible", even though they had indeed been at the location.

Rubislaw 32 link

11/17/2017 06:25:01 pm

In agreement with you on that,Ray,and well illustrated.

Slightly off topic,but it immediately made me think of Zodiac who,more than likely,secured Paul Stine's taxi,in the close proximity of Union Square,in the hub of Theatres,starting to eject their evening's audiences,on a Saturday evening.

As Richard has proffered,Zodiac may well have taken in a movie,at a cinema,such as Northpoint...then made the walk to Union Square,at a time that he knew that he would be unlikely to be noticed.....just disappearing into the crowd,and securing his ''chauffeur driving'' victim.

monarch link

11/17/2017 09:18:42 pm

Richard, the only problem with your theory of a passenger disabling Cheri's car is that it would have been much easier to simply take Cheri Jo's car keys.

Richard

11/18/2017 01:49:03 am

Good point Monarch, I considered that, but without knowing the exact dynamics of the crime, which could have unfolded in many different ways I tried to simplify it to cover the keys, rolled windows on both sides, right door slightly ajar and doors unlocked. People do strange things in heated moments- it may have been a more personal attack on her vehicle, knowing her Volkswagen was her prized possession, maybe they were arguing outside the vehicle at this juncture and he reacted by accessing the engine compartment, hence the leaving of greasy fingerprints- something you certainly wouldn't have done if this was a pre-planned, well thought out murder. It certainly doesn't take much common sense to use gloves in this instance. If fingerprints were discovered on the door and hood of the vehicle, and they matched, it seems odd that the perpetrator ever needed to touch the door, had his prime objective been to simply disable the vehicle. The disorganized nature her vehicle was discovered the following morning appears to fly in the face of a woman, who cherished her vehicle, merely wandering off with a good Samaritan on the offer of assistance. The state of her vehicle suggests to me anyway, something occurred fairly rapidly to force her to effectively abandon the vehicle, such as a threat of harm or to her life. The right window rolled is either indicative of a passenger later that evening or of a hot vehicle earlier in the evening, when Riverside temperatures were in the 80s, and she rolled both windows herself to vent the vehicle. If the newspaper report is correct and the right passenger door was slightly ajar (not fully closed) then this may, but not exclusively, indicate a passenger who failed to fully shut the door. Knowing she was a young woman, who worked hard to acquire and run her Volkswagen Beetle, its condition is not that of a woman who left her vehicle willingly. The exact mechanics of those final moments may never be fully understood, but everything to me, including the vehicle condition, fingerprints left on the vehicle and the frenzied attack with a small bladed pocket knife, appears on the face of it an unpremeditated attack, something that boiled over, and certainly not while she had just left the library. The time the screams were heard don't tally with this premise, neither does the female eyewitness who passed along the alleyway at 9.30 pm (if correct).

monarch link

11/18/2017 03:16:06 am

Yes, excellent points Richard, lots of possible scenarios.

Ray Jenkins

11/18/2017 03:31:38 am

"The disorganized nature her vehicle was discovered the following morning appears to fly in the face of a woman, who cherished her vehicle, merely wandering off with a good Samaritan on the offer of assistance. The state of her vehicle suggests to me anyway, something occurred fairly rapidly to force her to effectively abandon the vehicle, such as a threat of harm or to her life."

It is possible to speculate on a multitude of scenarios. Often the totally unexpected thing that seems to fly in the face of all logic turns out to be what really happened. People often do not behave logically at the best of times, moreso if they are afraid.

Also, I am not sure what the crime rate (general theft, break ins,stealing cars) was like in the mid-60s in that part of America, but I tend to think it would not have been unusual for people to leave their cars unlocked or at least lock them and leave the windows down. In those days it would not have been unusual to find cars parked with the keys in the ignition. I spoke to someone who grew up in suburban LA during that time and she confirms that this was the case. The thing is, we are looking back at a time that was vastly different to the social context of today. People were also generally far more trusting than they are today. So what may seem unusual or extraordinary in the modern context may not have been the case back then.

monarch link

11/17/2017 09:34:44 pm

In response to the officer Kelley theory of Tom Voight, since Kelley is a convicted felon his finger prints should be in the FBI's finger print computer and it should automatically make a match to the Bates crime scene prints.

monarch link

11/18/2017 03:25:14 am

Interesting bit of information I dug up about Bud Kelley, I looked him up in the 1966 Riverside phone book his address at that time was 7718 Magnolia Ave. that is directly across the street from Ramona High School (where Cheri Jo graduated from)

Ray Jenkins

11/18/2017 03:48:18 am

Wow, that's too bad for the many people who got banned from forums simply because they were not in agreement with the prevailing Gyke theory of the time. So now, just maybe, it was not Gyke after all? Oh dear! ;-)

Interestingly, my solution to the Celebrity Cipher reveals an anagram which clearly says "Zodiac is K". I have often wondered if the K might be Kane. But now, maybe Kelley? Perhaps the Zodiac's elaborate costume, which paid homage to Ned Kelly's bullet-proof outfit, could make sense in this regard.

Ray Jenkins

11/18/2017 03:53:18 am

That is VERY INTERESTING Monarch, re the proximity of Kelley to Ramona High. I have always felt that her attacker had to have been someone who had his eye on her for some time, AND he was in some position of trust that would not have raised Cheri's suspicions until it was too late of course and she got attacked.

Rubislaw 32 link

11/18/2017 02:40:23 am

So true,monarch....and a very pertinent point made.

My feelings are that Zodiac probably has a not insignificant list of traffic offences,over the years.Possibly a juvenile delinquent ''indiscretion'',or two,from his early years,also.

But one,possibly glaring reason,that he has not been caught,in all these years.....is that he has no actual criminal record.Therefore,very difficult to pin down,by ''cross-referencing'' forms of investigation.

Richard

11/18/2017 10:16:48 am

If the murderer of Cheri Jo Bates was a resident in the adjoining streets near the college, bearing in mind his possible knowledge of the two vacant buildings and the suggestion in the Confession letter he was "stalking your girls," plus his mentioning of girls in the alley- then I would like to get a directory from 1966 of streets possibly 10 minutes radius around the college. I can then cross check them with the Polk directory names and addresses I have for the north side of the Springs and Tuolumne payphone. Any correlations, then bingo.
Equally, the same could be done for school records in Riverside, with names around the payphone in Vallejo.

monarch link

11/18/2017 03:36:28 pm

Richard, I think Mike Morford has a Riverside Polk directory, send him a PM at his Site.

Richard

11/18/2017 03:47:36 pm

Cheers Monarch, I'll get in touch.

THE CONFIRMATION LETTER

Leave a Reply.