Why is There No Definitive Book on the Zodiac Case?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve just started reading ‘In The Wake Of The Butcher’ by Badal on the Cleveland Torso Murders. It was recommended to me by Howard on the JTRForum. Would this be considered the difinitive book on that case? It’s the first one that I’ve read. I don’t mean the first book that I’ve read by the way

[Herlock Sholmes]

If folks were asked to nominate a definitive Ripper book, I bet most would unhesitatingly say "Sugden"

Hello Sam,

Long time no speak I’m sure that you’re right that Sugden would get the nod, my only criticism would be that he says that Chapman is the likeliest suspects?! Obviously Begg and Rumbelow would get a mention. I always wished that someone could do a ripper book with the same level of research and detail as Vincent Bugliosi’s Reclaiming History (on the JFK assassination.) If you’ve got twenty years to spare Sam

[Herlock Sholmes]

Allen wasn't a match for the DNA, handwriting, or the finger/palm prints.

Is that conclusive Harry? Didn’t Graysmith mention the fact that as Allen was ambidextrous this could explain the handwriting not matching? I’m definately not arguing the point as i just don’t know.

Is Kane considered the likeliest suspect?

[Sam Flynn]

Come to think of it there is no definitive book on the Ripper murders

If folks were asked to nominate a definitive Ripper book, I bet most would unhesitatingly say "Sugden"

[John Wheat]

I have always been surprised and frustrated that there is no definitive, or even competent, book dealing with the Zodiac case.

Come to think of it there is no definitive book on the Ripper murders and a number of books seem to be lacking in competence. Why is this?

[Harry D]

I’ve just read Graysmith’s Zodiac Unmasked after becoming interested watching the first 3 episodes of The History Channels ‘Case Closed.’

I’m a complete Zodiac novice but I have to say there appears to be a staggering amount of ‘pointers’ to Arthur Leigh Allen? I’ve just read that many consider Graysmith unreliable. Has Allen now been dismissed/disproven as a suspect? Has this History Channel series uncovered the killer?

Anybody know?

Allen wasn't a match for the DNA, handwriting, or the finger/palm prints.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi, Herlock,

I don't know a great deal about the ZK case, but have been following the History Channel documentary series. It is very interesting, and they do claim their code-breaking computer decoded the name of the serial killer, per last week's episode. (Naturally, they saved the reveal for another show, which I haven't seen yet, sigh...)

Hi Pat,

I think that the name they come up with is Lawrence Kane and a bit of googling has confirmed that the name ‘Kane’ was in the cypher.

I have a look on here tomorrow and see what the experts say.

http://zodiackillersite.com/

[Pcdunn]

Hi, Herlock,

I don't know a great deal about the ZK case, but have been following the History Channel documentary series. It is very interesting, and they do claim their code-breaking computer decoded the name of the serial killer, per last week's episode. (Naturally, they saved the reveal for another show, which I haven't seen yet, sigh...)

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve just read Graysmith’s Zodiac Unmasked after becoming interested watching the first 3 episodes of The History Channels ‘Case Closed.’

I’m a complete Zodiac novice but I have to say there appears to be a staggering amount of ‘pointers’ to Arthur Leigh Allen? I’ve just read that many consider Graysmith unreliable. Has Allen now been dismissed/disproven as a suspect? Has this History Channel series uncovered the killer?

Anybody know?

[YankeeSergeant]

Graysmith maintained that he knew who "Zodiac" was in his first book (I have not read the second) on the Zodiac killings.. I'm not sure I buy all of what he's selling, but as barnflat states above, Graysmith is a good starting point. Will Zodiac be the 1960s version of Jack the Ripper? Only time will tell.

[barnflatwyngarde]

I consider Graysmith's book decent enough for a start off. Zodiac does have two good movies (the 2007 film and the 2005 Alexander Bulkley release) based on the crimes. I'm not sure any other case can say that.

Hi sdreid.

As a rough overview of the case, the first Graysmith book "Zodiac" is ok, but it does contain some worrying errors, and there is evidence that Graysmith did in fact play fast and loose with some elements of the case.

I attach a link which goes into greater detail about these errors and omissions.

http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/graysmith.htm

[sdreid]

I consider Graysmith's book decent enough for a start off. Zodiac does have two good movies (the 2007 film and the 2005 Alexander Bulkley release) based on the crimes. I'm not sure any other case can say that.

[Pcdunn]

I may have to read Graysmith's books. I saw the 2007 movie called "Zodiac" which was based on them. It seemed very well done, as historical serial killer movies go.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443706/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

[barnflatwyngarde]

Found this thread on another forum discussing the same question, Barnflatwyngarde. Might be of some use to you?

https://www.reddit.com/r/serialkille...zodiac_killer/

Thank for this Pcdunn.

It just amazes me that no author sees the possibilities in writing a well researched factual account of this incredible case.

The Graysmith book is still probably the best of the bunch, but he does play fast and loose with some elements of the case.

[Pcdunn]

By the way, a Google search for "Zodiac Killer" brings up hits about former Presidential candidate Ted Cruz possibly being the ZK! All sorts of bizarre declarations can be found in Internetland...