Is Louis Myers the Zodiac Killer?

[Beowulf]

Man says now-dead buddy confessed to being Bay Area murderer

Randy Kenney says Myers started the spree in 1968, at age 17, after he broke up with a girlfriend. Kenney says other evidence shows his friend, who died in 2002, committed at least the five murders.



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crim...#ixzz2wLDKTBQ5

[Abby Normal]

Fascinating, thanks for posting. But my initial reaction is no. Too young.

Plus, the zodiac wwas pretty obsessed with making sure everybody knew his crimes were his. I think the zodiac if he were to confess would make sure there would be no doubt, not like this guy did by just telling someone it was him with no proof.

Also, he does not look anything like the witness descriptions.

My money is still on Allen.

[Beowulf]

Actually, since I did not know anything about the Zodiac killer I watched this film today...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI0jnsbZwys
and now am totally freaked out.

Then I read some, yes, I can see your point about Arthur Leigh Allen but the DNA failing evidence makes me feel it unlikely. What do you think about that?

But the one girl that was killed said to her date about the man who was stalking them, 'oh, it's Richard. He's jealous' Making me wonder about this suspect:

http://www.zodiackiller.com/SuspectGaikowski.html

[Abby Normal]

Actually, since I did not know anything about the Zodiac killer I watched this film today...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI0jnsbZwys
and now am totally freaked out.

Then I read some, yes, I can see your point about Arthur Leigh Allen but the DNA failing evidence makes me feel it unlikely. What do you think about that?

But the one girl that was killed said to her date about the man who was stalking them, 'oh, it's Richard. He's jealous' Making me wonder about this suspect:
http://www.zodiackiller.com/SuspectGaikowski.html

I am usually totally convinced from DNA evidence, but not necessarily in the zodiac case. It's old, it was was collected when DNA process was in its infancy and besides the DNA found may not be the killers. Id be more concerned that apparently none of Allen's handwriting matches the known zodiac writings, but someone who used codes to mess with the police could easily disguise his handwriting.

[RivkahChaya]

I am usually totally convinced from DNA evidence, but not necessarily in the zodiac case. It's old, it was was collected when DNA process was in its infancy and besides the DNA found may not be the killers. Id be more concerned that apparently none of Allen's handwriting matches the known zodiac writings, but someone who used codes to mess with the police could easily disguise his handwriting.

The surviving victims were pretty sure the Zodiac was close to middle-aged, and at the very youngest, about 30. That guy is not just 17, but a pretty young-looking 17. He looks like he'd still got carded when he was 30. (Or would have, if people cared about that then.)

The DNA convinces me RE: Allen, because it was only about 8 years ago, not the "infancy" of DNA testing, and IIRC, the samples were consistent among different stamps and envelopes. I don't find the friend who claims that Allen used the get other people to lick stamps for him, because he didn't like to do so credible. It was a post hoc story, and this friend had come up with lots of post hoc stories for various reasons that this or that evidence seemed not to pan out, and besides, stamp sponges have been around forever-- you could get one at any stationery store. If Allen hated licking stamps and envelopes that much, he would get a stamp sponge, not carry something around waiting to find someone willing to lick it for him. Plus, I think someone would have come forward to say "Hey, I licked a stamp for him." Even more suspicious: the "good friend" with the post hoc story did not admit to licking any stamps himself, probably because he knew his DNA wouldn't match. Moreover, how likely was it that Allen would trust the Zodiac mail to someone else? I think he would overcome his dislike (or get the damn sponge) in order not to risk someone else seeing the Zodiac letters.

[Beowulf]

I don't get the 'he's only 17' refuting. So, he's 17. Holding a gun at 17 makes you the big guy. One of the couples he had tie themselves up, which the girl tied the guy, he tied the girl then tightened the knots on the guy and stabbed both. Being tied and helpless being 17 had little to do with it at that point.

But I think Rivkahchaya is right about the stamp sponge.

Also, I thought Allen's handwriting was not so unclose to the Zodiak's.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/AZWriting.html

[RivkahChaya]

The "he's only 17" comes from the fact that eyewitnesses, including surviving victims, report someone over 30. If that is a photo of the suspect at 17, then there is no way he could be mistaken for older than 30.

He also has a long face, and the eyewitness descriptions report someone with a round face. Granted, combing his hair differently could make him look very different, and he could have had a deep or gravelly voice, but I still have trouble seeing how they could get that age that wrong.

[GUT]

G'day Rivkah

I agree about the age, how could you mistake him for 30.

[RivkahChaya]

Another note: in a letter to the police, the Zodiac refers to his victims as "kids." If the Zodiac were really 17-18, he would have been referring to people who were actually slightly older than he was (by a year or so, IIRC) when he said "kids." This seems like a point against the Zodiac being a teenager.

[Beowulf]

The "he's only 17" comes from the fact that eyewitnesses, including surviving victims, report someone over 30. If that is a photo of the suspect at 17, then there is no way he could be mistaken for older than 30.

Ah. Makes sense.

How can someone make a death bed confession and not be telling the truth? Was the guy delusional, and I mean that in the true sense of the word. Strange in itself.

[RivkahChaya]

Why couldn't a deathbed confession be a lie? but more likely, the person claiming to have heard it may be lying. Anyone else think the guy claiming to have heard the confession looks a lot like the composite sketches of the Zodiac? How old was he in 1968?

[Abby Normal]

What's weird is another guy in that article says Myers also confessed to him in the seventies but that he brushed it off. Myers went to high school with two of the victims and also worked with one of them.

I think it might be a case of semi delusional and or being obsessed with the case since he was very close to it. But I think there is enough to go on to check it out, absolutely.

[RivkahChaya]

Confessing to crimes one did not do is relatively common; every famous crime has a list of false confessors who, for one reason or another, could not possibly have done it-- and in some cases, the same person has confessed to multiple crimes-- a "serial confessor," I guess. A confession with no evidence whatsoever is very shaky. A hearsay confession, even more so.

Does the guy who supposedly heard the 1976 confession have anyone who can come forward and say "Yes, he told me back in 1976"? I mean, he claims he went to the police. Is there an officer who remembers the guy coming into the station in 1976?

[GUT]

There is actually a guy in Sweden just released after 20 years for serial killings that he confessed to that he has now been proven innocent of.

[Errata]

My grandmother confessed to serving the Nazis when she was a prisoner at Auschwitz. Never happened. She was never in Auschwitz, never in Poland, never a prisoner of the Nazis. She came to the US when she was about 18 months old. She was in Brooklyn during the Holocaust. The whole time.

So why did she confess? Well, advanced dementia probably had a lot to do with it, but to be brutally honest she always felt cheated somehow by not having been in Europe at the time. A little survivors guilt, but mostly she had nothing to do with most defining moment for Judaism in 500 years, and a lot of people she knew WERE there. They DID go through it. She felt left out.