The Zodiac Killer

[nicole]

Hi all,

Pinkerton, you say:

This is my take anyway. "Zodiackiller.com" is a wealth of information about the Zodiac case. It is the equivalent of the "Casebook" of the Zodiac crimes.

I'd have to disagree with you. The biggest difference is that the zodiackiller site (and in particular, it's 'main man' Tom Voigt) leans heavily towards one suspect Arthur Leigh Allen.

Nicole

[Pinkerton]

Hi all,

Pinkerton, you say:


I'd have to disagree with you. The biggest difference is that the zodiackiller site (and in particular, it's 'main man' Tom Voigt) leans heavily towards one suspect Arthur Leigh Allen.

Nicole

While I'm not comparing the two sites in terms of their "approach" , in terms of being a repository of information, they both are the best sources of information out there. If you know of any others I would like to here them...

And just to be factual, Tom Voight (the owner of zodiackiller.com) GAVE UP on Arthur Leigh Allen as his main suspect a few years ago (see http://www.zodiackiller.com/FAQ.html). He now thinks ALA is unlikely to be the Zodiac, and along with Mike Butterfield (who will shortly be releasing a book on the subject) has exposed Robert Greysmith (the main proponent of the Arthur Leigh Allen theory) for the fraud that he is. Greysmith's book is full of innuendo, fiction, and flat out disinformation.

[robhouse]

But I think the fact that the FBI are taking Tarrance seriously as a suspect, at least validates him as a suspect... Zodiackiller.com does not even mention Tarrance on its suspects page, even though it does still list Allen, and it gives huge preference for this other guy Richard Gaikowski. Does not seem very objective to me.

According to Dennis Kaufman, he has been smeared by these people for years... yes we must see both sides of the argument here. But clearly zodiac world is plagued by the same kind of persoanl attacks and political infighting as we have in ripperology. I am not sure who to believe, and I do not know that much about the case. But in my opinion, Kaufman's "evidence" is pretty persuasive. As I said before, either Jack Tarrance was the zodiac killer, OR this is a hoax perpetrated by Kaufman (and/or Tarrance himself). I find it a bit hard to believe that this is a hoax though...

RH

[poorhoney]

Hi all,

Back to the cross-contamination, I always felt the prints could have been left be a previous fare and missed during the killer's cleanup attempt.

I felt better about this being the solution to the case before I read his website.

-Honey

[nicole]

Hi all,

Pinkerton, you say:

While I'm not comparing the two sites in terms of their "approach" , in terms of being a repository of information, they both are the best sources of information out there.

Sorry about the confusion, Pinkerton...it's just that you had said (and I quote)

{Zodiackiller.com} is the equivalent of the "Casebook" of the Zodiac crimes.

And only now you clarify yourself by saying

While I'm not comparing the two sites in terms of their "approach" , in terms of being a repository of information, they both are the best sources of information out there.

Ah! Well now, that different! I'd have to agree with you there. Both sites are the premiem source of collected info on JTR and The Zodiac, respectfully.

And just to be factual, Tom Voight (the owner of zodiackiller.com) GAVE UP on Arthur Leigh Allen as his main suspect a few years ago

I quite aware of THAT fact, Pinkerton!! But it STILL hasn't stopped Voigt giving Arthur Leigh Allen the 'red-carpet-treatment', has it?? Voigt still gives ALA his own special sub-heading on the sites index. "Victims, Suspects, The Arthur Leigh Allen File,..." That would be the equivilant of Casebook's S.P.Ryder creating an index on this site something like "Victims, Suspects, The James Maybrick File" !! It's unthinkable and clearly biased.

Nicole

[Philzilla]

http://www.zodiackiller.com/discus/messages/27/786.html

They dismissed Tarrance a while ago.
The reason why ALA still gets the "RED CARPET" is because of the greysmith book which is still the book to introduce the Zodiac crimes. People who come to the case come to it through the yellow book.
The ALA file clearly corrects the record about ALA. Biased it is not. It just recognizes that peopel interested in the case generally except ALA as the Zodiac, much like this site peopel come over with the impression Maybrick or Sickert are the ripper.

[Lewis]

Things like this emerge all the time. Ignore it, it had to be Arthur Leigh whatshisname.

Arthur Leigh Allen(sp?) failed the DNA test as well as failing to match on some other forensic evidence.

[sdreid]

A few days ago, TruTV did a one hour show where some "psychics" went after Zodiac. Of course, they could tell us absolutely everything about the killer except his name and address.

[Stephen Thomas]

Woman claims her dead father was the Zodiac Killer

http://cbs5.com/crime/zodiac.killer.claim.2.997735.html

[sdreid]

Thanks Stephen! Since we have DNA, that should be quick to prove or disprove.

I'm waiting for some 95 year-old woman to claim her dad was JtR which is possible.

[Ally]

We were talking briefly about the new claims in the chatroom last night. If true all I can say is ..wow...truth stranger than fiction.

[jmenges]

It seems like, in less than 24 hours, this has already been debunked.

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime/ci_12259404?nclick_check=1

Tom Voight, admittedly "obsessed" with the case as an outside observer behind the Web site, zodiackiller.com, said Perez's claim "is 100 percent bull."
"Deborah Perez contacted me about a year ago," Voight said from his Oregon home. "She sent me several detailed e-mails, and also several detailed voicemails, of which I still have. Her story was full of factual errors, the same errors that were published in the popular yellow Zodiac book she was obviously cribbing from."
Also, added Voight, "Perez claimed to be the cousin of Zodiac victim Darlene Ferrin's ex-husband, Jim Crabtree, and that is how Perez's father, the Zodiac, knew Darlene and targeted her. Apparently, Perez was under the impression Crabtree was deceased or somehow unable to be found and asked about his alleged cousin. Well, Crabtree is a good source of mine and I let him know of Deborah's claim and he verified that she is full of it and a liar, to boot."
Crabtree said Wednesday afternoon that until he was approached by Voight "I had never heard of Debra Perez. She claims to know my parents or adopted parents and puts forth names that are absolutely not correct."

JM

[Magpie]

This sounds like another "Daddy was the Black Dahlia Killer" scenario.

I hope for Mr. Voigt's sake that that's not the case, because otherwise Ms Perez might just make his life a living hell (which sadly I can vouch for first hand)

[Archaic]

Hi, everybody. I was thinking about what would have happened if Dennis Rader had suddenly passed away BEFORE being caught... His family would have eventually found some very odd little boxes of scary photographs & grotesque souvenirs; the ones he used to enjoy privately up in his backyard tree-house. I don't know if Torrance is guilty, but it does seem at least possible; if the case is ever solved after all these years it will probably only be after the s.o.b. is dead. But the FBI has had plenty of time to look into Torrance; haven't they made some kind of official pronouncement by now?

Also, as regards the lady who just accused her own dead father of being the Zodiac Killer, I have a question: Is there a handy scientific word to describe people suffering from a weird compulsion to attract attention to themselves by accusing close family members of being heinous Murderers- something like 'Munchausen-Ripper-By-Proxy Syndrome'?

[The Grave Maurice]

This, frankly, is a case that has never interested me very much, but I'm old enough to remember when it was in the papers. The Jake Gyllenhaal movie was on TV late last night and, since it's a long weekend here, I was able to stay up to see it. I found it fascinating. But, I need Stan, or another informed opinion, to tell me if the movie has the facts straight. If it does, I might try to lay my hands on a copy of Robert Graysmith's book.