|Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 11:11 pm: |
Portrait of a Zodiac Scavenger
“Stirring up people, getting things accomplished, making a difference. Isn’t that what books should be about?” -- Robert Graysmith
History will forever link the name of Robert Graysmith to the notorious Zodiac murders. This, of course, is no accident. For more than twenty years, Graysmith has seized every opportunity to exploit the tragedy for his own benefit. With the re-release of ZODIAC: UNMASKED, Graysmith is once again claiming that he has identified one of America's most elusive serial killers, and once again, he is determined that the truth should not stand in his way.
Graysmith’s two books about the still-unsolved case have been widely discredited by critics, researchers, investigators, witnesses and others, yet his largely fictional accounts have served as the basis for a new major motion picture directed by David Fincher (Se7en, Fight Club). As the cartoonist-turned-crime writer is immortalized on film, audiences are entitled to know the true story behind the career and character of a Zodiac scavenger.
The Making of a Book
When the Zodiac crimes first began in the late 1960s, Robert Graysmith was a political cartoonist employed at the San Francisco Chronicle. The killer who called himself "the Zodiac" sent many letters to the Chronicle from 1969 to 1974. Graysmith was not involved in the case or the investigation.
By 1976, Graysmith obtained a copyright for his own book about the Zodiac case. In December of 1980, Graysmith had said that his book would be published by Norton and available in 1981. The last entries in Graysmith's book are dated around this time. In 1983, columnist Herb Caen wrote an article stating that Graysmith's book, then titled "THIS IS THE ZODIAC SPEAKING," would be published by St. Martin's Press and available in the fall of that year. It would be three more years before the book appeared with the title ZODIAC. When released in 1986, ZODIAC was a best seller, and became known as the definitive account of the case. However, Graysmith's story of the Zodiac's murders, methods and motives was incomplete, and major portions of the book are now obsolete.
ZODIAC promised to present "the complete text" of the Zodiac letters, going so far as to guarantee readers, "In this book, for the first time, is every word Zodiac wrote...” On page 152, Graysmith proves otherwise. When describing the Zodiac's thirteenth letter, Graysmith claims the letter is "reprinted completely here for the first time," yet immediately seems to forget this promise and proceeds to delete the first portion of the text. Graysmith makes other, similar omissions throughout the book.
Graysmith claimed that investigators had escorted him to the crimes scenes to describe how the attacks had happened. Despite this assistance, Graysmith’s book inaccurately identified the locations of three of the Zodiac’s four crimes.
As an amateur sleuth, Graysmith concocted many unsubstantiated theories, including the idea that Zodiac was killing according to some astrological pattern. Graysmith told readers of ZODIAC that he had finally solved one of the Zodiac's mysterious codes; however, FBI cryptographers stated that his solution was not valid.
Armistead Maupin, a San Francisco Chronicle columnist and author of the popular series “Tales of the City,” had been an unwitting participant in a scandal concerning a forged "Zodiac" letter. In an interview with United Press International writer Richard M. Harnett, Maupin said, "I think the public has already been terrified far too much by this boogeyman story," and expressed concerns that Graysmith's book would revive the hysteria surrounding the unsolved mystery. Maupin’s words proved prophetic when, shortly after the publication of Zodiac, more hoaxes and forged letters plagued police and the public.
The boogeyman story began all over again on the other side of the continent when a man responsible for several shootings in New York began to send letters to local newspapers and claimed to be the Zodiac. Police eventually captured the copycat, and a search of his belongings produced a well-thumbed copy of Graysmith's book. Some critics argued that the crime spree might have been avoided had Graysmith not provided such a sensational and glorified portrait of the Zodiac as inspiration.
Richard Harnett's review of Zodiac appeared in The Los Angeles Times on February 9, 1986, and offered some of the only media criticism of the book. Harnett wrote that a "good account of all the facts in the Zodiac affair would have been a valuable contribution ... but Graysmith, a newspaper cartoonist, took on the role of amateur sleuth rather than historian ... He neglects those parts of the historical record that don't fit into his scenario."
Most of Graysmith's scenarios revolved around Arthur Leigh Allen, a convicted child molester who first came to the attention of authorities in 1971 when an estranged friend told police Allen had confessed his intent to commit crimes similar to those of the Zodiac. The former friend had once complained to Allen's brother that the suspect had made improper advances toward his young daughter, but the friend did not reveal this allegation to police. Investigators did not question the suspect or the accuser about this possible motive to implicate Allen. The subsequent investigation by police in San Francisco and nearby Vallejo included the search of a trailer owned by Allen; however, investigators failed to uncover any evidence to link Allen to the Zodiac crimes. Allen once again came under scrutiny when the California Department of Justice conducted a review of the original Zodiac investigation, but authorities found no evidence to link Allen to the unsolved murders.
After Graysmith's book and its thinly veiled portrait of Allen made the suspect the subject of local curiosity, another man from Allen's past came forward and claimed Allen had confessed his intent to commit a Zodiac-like crime. Police had arrested Allen and the accuser more than 30 years earlier during a fight between the two men. The informant had committed several armed robberies and hoped to avoid a prison sentence by implicating Allen. The Vallejo police captain and a retired detective launched another investigation and eventually searched Allen's home. This investigation also failed to connect Allen to the Zodiac crimes but Allen's identity as the prime suspect in the unsolved murders reached the newspapers, local television news and even the syndicated tabloid shows A Current Affair and Geraldo Rivera's Now It Can Be Told.
In interviews conducted shortly before he died in 1992, Allen repeatedly declared his innocence and complained of harassment from the police and others. News reports of Allen's death often quoted Graysmith's book and repeated erroneous information about the suspect, further blurring the distinction between Allen and his fictional counterpart.
Graysmith's questionable efforts to link Allen to the crimes began in the introduction to Zodiac, where he informed readers that "one of the Zodiac's victims may have known his true name" and "this victim, in the act of turning Zodiac into the police, had been murdered." According to Graysmith, the victim in question, Darlene Ferrin, engaged in an intense argument with a mysterious stranger Graysmith believed to be a man identified only as "Lee," the nickname often used by Arthur Leigh Allen. In Graysmith's scenario, a car chase to Blue Rock Springs Park ended when the stranger approached Ferrin's vehicle, uttered her nickname, and proceeded to open fire on the victims. Ferrin's companion lived to tell a very different story and the original police reports effectively refute Graysmith's version of events.
Graysmith would later claim that a witness and his sister had heard Ferrin and her killer arguing just before the shooting occurred. The witness in question never claimed to have heard such an argument and he told police a very different story. The witness did not have a sister.
An Almost Completely Fictitious Person
"Starr was everywhere I looked."
Robert Graysmith, ZODIAC
ZODIAC presents a character based entirely upon a real-life suspect named Arthur Leigh Allen. Using the pseudonym "Starr", Graysmith creates the villain of the piece; a disturbed, violent man who is most likely responsible for the Zodiac murders, and suspected in the murders of more than 40 young women in and around Santa Rosa. "Starr" is so frightening that his own family believed he was the Zodiac and informed the police of their suspicions. Police believe "Starr" was the elusive killer, but could not find the proof they needed to put him behind bars. The book ends with the author's conclusion that "Starr" was the Zodiac, forever damning the character to eternal infamy.
The character of Bob Hall Starr and the man known as Arthur Leigh Allen are two different people, yet, for years, the two have been synonymous to the public. Just as TV's fugitive Doctor Richard Kimball was not Dr. Sam Shephard, and Dracula was not Vlad the Impaler, the difference between Starr and Allen lies in the gray area between fact and fiction.
Robert Graysmith based his fictional character on a real person, yet the fictional character exists in a work of nonfiction. Graysmith informed readers that he had changed the man's name, but few were aware, or would bother to suspect, that the author had also changed the facts to suit his purposes.
The subtle and deliberate manner in which Graysmith transformed Arthur Leigh Allen's life and person in order to give the reader the impression that he was the Zodiac is almost invisible to those who do not have access to or do not seek the facts. Relying on Graysmith to be truthful, the reader learns about Starr, and therefore, Allen, through his words. As readers are introduced to Starr, they are led down a path that has been carefully constructed by an author who was willing to distort the truth in order to convince readers that the character, and, by proxy, the suspect he represented, was the Zodiac.
The process of prejudicing the jury of readers begins on the back cover of Graysmith's book, ZODIAC, where he promised his readers the author's "theory of the Zodiac's true identity," which is based on "eight years of research" and "hundreds of facts never before released...." These claims give the author, and his conclusions, credibility.
On page 15 of ZODIAC, Graysmith introduced a mysterious stranger as a man who "frightened" Zodiac victim Darlene Ferrin in the months before her death. Several people claimed to have seen this man, but, in the decades since the crime, no one has identified this individual. According to Graysmith, Darlene was "scared to death" of the stranger, who watched her "constantly."
On page 18, readers learned that a strange man named "Bob" had known Darlene, and that "Bob" is not the man's real name. Later, this "Bob" will become "Starr," and although Darlene Ferrin did know a man named "Lee," there is no evidence that Arthur "Lee" Allen was that man. Neither "Starr," nor Allen, matches the physical description of "Bob," who was said to be "five feet eight inches tall or so...hair curly, wavy...dark hair..." Allen was at least six feet tall, practically bald, weighed two hundred pounds, and was 36 years old. One witness cited in ZODIAC stated that "Bob" was "thirty to twenty-eight and not heavy. He wore glasses." Allen did not wear glasses, and was, by any definition, "heavy."
Page 39 introduces the theory that Darlene had an argument with a "stranger" who then followed her to Blue Rock Springs Park and killed her.
Although there is no evidence that Darlene argued with such a man that night, Graysmith proceeds to tell readers that a Vallejo detective uncovered such information. In reality, police had learned that a witness had seen a waitress (not identified as Darlene Ferrin) talking to man in the parking lot of Darlene's place of work. This event occurred the afternoon before the midnight shooting, and the witness stated that the man and woman appeared to be talking about a vehicle, not arguing as Graysmith has claimed. The description of the man seen talking to a waitress in the parking lot does not match the description of the man who shot Darlene, although Graysmith continues to imply that the two men are the same individual. The descriptions of the man who was seen talking to a waitress in the parking lot does not match the description of "Bob," yet Graysmith continues to imply that the two men are one and the same. The description of the man who was seen talking to a waitress in the parking lot, the man who shot Darlene, and "Bob" do not match the description of "Bob Starr," but Graysmith leads the reader to believe he is all three.
Graysmith introduced the villain of his book on page 260 as "Robert 'Bob' Hall Starr," a "weird son of a bitch" who must be watched "all the time." A brief character study of "Starr" does match Arthur Allen on several counts, including the fact that he lived with his mother in her Vallejo home at the time of the Zodiac murders. "Starr" was highly intelligent, and a loner who collects rifles and enjoys hunting.
"Starr," like Allen, was a pedophile, and Graysmith concluded, "This would fit in with Zodiac's knowledge of school bus routes and vacation times for kiddies." The author does not mention that the Zodiac never demonstrated any knowledge of any bus routes, or that anyone who had attended school for at least a year would possess accurate knowledge regarding the "vacation times" of schoolchildren.
Graysmith repeats a theory that "Starr" had access to a car similar to that used by the Zodiac at the Blue Rock Springs shooting. The author appears to have had access to the police report detailing the investigation of this possibility, but neglects to mention that the same report states that police learned that Allen had most likely not used the car.
The author's efforts to implicate his suspect continued in the years since the publication of ZODIAC. Graysmith spread an unsubstantiated rumor that Allen had received a speeding ticket near the scene of Zodiac's Lake Berryessa attack. This rumor eventually appeared as a verified fact in a book written by former FBI profiler John Douglas.
In an article for the website APBnews.com, Graysmith claimed that excited SFPD investigators had contacted him with news that initial DNA tests had produced a positive match to Allen’s DNA. The article described a meeting in which the disappointed investigators broke the bad news that the match was a “false positive.” The investigators in question stated that no false positive match ever occurred and that the entire story is not true.
The 1978 Letter
Two years after Graysmith obtained the copyright for his book, The San Francisco Chronicle received the first Zodiac letter in almost four years. Although initially deemed authentic, several handwriting experts subsequently concluded that the letter was a forgery. Graysmith claimed the letter was authentic and soon constructed an elaborate, though seriously flawed, theory to support this claim. According to Graysmith, the Zodiac used handwriting samples obtained from several different people and an enlarger/projector in order to fabricate his handwriting style.
The writing on Bryan Hartnell's car door is unmistakably similar to the Zodiac's handwriting, and Morrill himself concluded that the Zodiac was responsible for that message. It is unlikely, if not implausible, that the Zodiac used a projector on this occasion.
In Zodiac, Graysmith put forth the theory that Allen was the Zodiac, and, therefore, the author of the Zodiac's many handwritten messages. He used his elaborate projector theory to explain how Allen was able to disguise his handwriting and fool document experts such as Sherwood Morrill, who was only one of several experts to conclude that Allen did not write the Zodiac letters.
Graysmith claims in one quick sentence, "Sherwood Morrill confirmed my theory." (pg. 219). Yet he states that in 1981 he "dropped in on Sherwood Morrill "to compare handwriting of a suspect with the Zodiac's (Zodiac, pg. 298, paperback edition). If Morrill actually believed that Graysmith's projector theory was true, he would not continue to exclude or include suspects based on their handwriting. Graysmith seems oblivious to this blatant contradiction.
Official documents and media interviews, as well as the expert’s family, demonstrate that Morrill’s opinions never changed throughout his many years on the case. Until his death, Morrill stated that he was certain the Zodiac used his normal handwriting when writing the letters and the expert was unwavering in his belief that he could identify the killer using little more than a bank deposit slip.
Graysmith's theories collided with modern science when the SFPD Crime Lab obtained a DNA sample from the envelope that had contained the 1978 letter and compared that sample to DNA taken from Allen shortly after his death. The samples did not match. In an article for The San Francisco Chronicle, Graysmith wondered why authorities would test a letter that everyone believed to be a forgery. An odd statement, considering that Graysmith was one of the only individuals who had been claiming that the Zodiac had actually written the 1978 letter.
Faced with handwriting and DNA evidence that excluded Allen as the author of the 1978 letter, Graysmith conveniently began to speculate that mysterious, unnamed accomplices might have written the Zodiac letters while Allen committed the actual crimes. Graysmith has quickly embraced this theory since new DNA tests on other Zodiac letters have once again excluded Allen.
By 1999, Graysmith seemed to have lost track of his multiple if ever-flexible positions on the 1978 letter. In an on-camera interview for the television program Perfect Crimes, Graysmith told viewers that "we" received a Zodiac letter on the day after Allen was released from Atascadero. Allen was released from Atascadero in August of 1977. The letter in question arrived at the offices of The San Francisco Chronicle in April of 1978.
The SEQUEL: The Making of a Myth
In his book, Zodiac Unmasked, Graysmith claimed that Allen had known and even stalked all of the Zodiac victims. He repeated this claim during many television interviews and stated Allen could be placed at the scenes of all Zodiac crimes. Extensive investigation by police and others has consistently failed to produce any credible evidence linking Allen to any of the victims and Graysmith has provided no evidence to support these claims.
More than 23 years after the shooting at Blue Rock Springs Park, a retired Vallejo detective showed the surviving victim the photographs of several men, including Arthur Leigh Allen. According to the detective, the victim pointed to Allen's picture and said, "That's the man who shot me."
Graysmith and others often refer to this event as a "positive identification." The report the detective submitted to the Vallejo police department at the time reveals that the witness also pointed to the photo of another man and said, "He had a face like him." When asked to rate his identification on a scale from one to ten, the witness gave himself a grade of eight. The Vallejo police department did not consider the statements of the witness to be a positive identification and had little faith in his ability to identify a man he glimpsed only for a moment in a dark parking lot more than two decades earlier. This questionable eyewitness identification was the only evidence to indicate that Allen could be placed at the scenes of any Zodiac crimes.
In Zodiac, Graysmith claimed Allen "had been fired from a job at a gas station the week before (Ferrin's) death. A friend of (Allen's) parked his Ford sedan there overnight to be repaired." Graysmith theorized that Allen used the car on the night of Ferrin's murder. Police had investigated this possibility in 1971 and learned that the friend had parked the car at the station for more than two weeks during the summer of 1969, but neither Allen’s friend nor the station owner could recall if the car had been at the station on the night of the crime. Allen had lost his job at the station more than three months before the night in question and police determined he most likely did not have access to the vehicle at the time of the shooting. In Zodiac Unmasked, Graysmith accurately stated that the friend had left the car at the station for two weeks in an attempt to sell it, but then told readers that the friend had left the car for repairs and even described a detective's fictional desperation to locate a nonexistent repair invoice.
In both Zodiac and the sequel, Zodiac Unmasked, Graysmith frequently altered the testimony of witnesses and changed important dates in official documents, including the newly released FBI files on the Zodiac case. These files revealed that someone claiming to be the Zodiac had called famed San Francisco attorney Melvin Belli and said, "Today's my birthday." Graysmith stated that this event took place on Allen's birthday and cited a specific FBI report by number, despite the fact that the report does not substantiate his story and the only dates featured on the document indicate the call occurred after Allen's birthday.
Graysmith also attempted to revise Vallejo geography on page 425 of Zodiac Unmasked. The author claimed to have discovered a “hidden road” that led him “in a dead straight line” from the crime scenes to Allen’s home. Graysmith claimed the road was so well hidden that he had to make an “abrupt turn” to make this sensational discovery.
In June of 2003, several Zodiac researchers drove the streets of Vallejo in an attempt to locate the road Graysmith described but were unable to do so using the information provided in the book. Telephone requests for assistance from the author went unanswered. Further research proved that Graysmith's phantom road does not appear on maps from the 1960s or today, and, in fact, never existed.
Zodiac stated that Allen terrified his family, and that they had suspected he was the Zodiac. Graysmith repeated these claims in Zodiac Unmasked, and even suggested that Ron Allen’s wife, Karen, had been the source of several anonymous calls to police regarding Allen in 1969. Police reports state that both Ron and Karen were surprised to learn Allen was a suspect and did not believe he was the Zodiac. Graysmith also claimed that Karen Allen had seen bloody knives on Allen's car seat despite the fact that the very police reports Graysmith used as his source state that Allen himself had mentioned the knives and there was no evidence Karen had seen them.
On page 200 of Zodiac Unmasked, Graysmith presents a drawing he claims Karen Allen produced while under hypnosis using "automatic writing." The drawing allegedly proves that Allen was in possession of Zodiac-like codes long before the killer’s codes appeared in the newspapers. Karen Allen was never hypnotized, and she never produced the drawing shown in Graysmith’s book.
In a recent interview, Karen Allen stated she and her husband did not believe that Allen was the Zodiac, and cited the results of fingerprint, palm print, handwriting, and even DNA comparisons that have failed to link Allen to the crimes. The continuing attempts by Graysmith and others to brand Allen as the most notorious serial killer in California history have been the source of great frustration and grief in the Allen family. "He (Allen) is dead and the Zodiac case is closed . . . no one knows who the Zodiac was," said Karen. "We've put up with this for so long."
Ghoul: an evil spirit that robs graves and feeds on the dead
Graysmith followed ZODIAC with more true crime books, such as THE SLEEPING LADY and THE MURDER OF BOB CRANE. On the dust jackets for these books, Graysmith and his publishers were content to refer to Graysmith as "the best selling author of ZODIAC." Yet, after Allen's death in 1992, Graysmith abandoned all shame, not to mention the truth. His UNABOMBER A DESIRE TO KILL features the blurb "Robert Graysmith, the man who solved the Zodiac murders..." as well as Graysmith's modest claim that he is one of the nation's leading experts on serial killers. Exaggerating his importance as a political cartoonist, Graysmith also claims that he was a "journalist" at the San Francisco Chronicle for twenty years. In THE BELL TOWER, Graysmith claims he has identified yet another infamous serial killer, Jack the Ripper, and offers a rather ridiculous solution to the long-unsolved mystery.
Graysmith's book about the unsolved murder of Hogan’s Heroes TV star Bob Crane served as the basis for the film AUTO FOCUS. In a statement released to the media, Crane's sons had complaints similar to those involved in the Zodiac case. "The book (The Murder of Bob Crane) by Graysmith is nothing to trust. He finished the book before the case (against a suspect who was later acquitted) was complete and he left out a lot of the facts as well as made up his own lies."
Graysmith appeared on television several times after the publication of ZODIAC UNMASKED. During appearances on the cable news channel MSNBC, Graysmith stated that the Zodiac called his crimes "a game of outdoor chess," and plotted his crimes using "the horoscope." Graysmith also claimed that Allen knew, and stalked, all of the victims. He once again repeated his false claim that Allen could be placed at all the crime scenes. In fact, the Zodiac never used the phrase "outdoor chess," and there is no evidence to indicate that he plotted his crimes using the horoscope. More importantly, there is absolutely no evidence that Allen knew any of the victims, let alone all of them. The claim that Allen stalked all of the victims is also unsubstantiated, and reminiscent of the author's twisting of truth in ZODIAC regarding the mysterious and frightening "Bob," and "Starr."
In an interview for ABC's PRIME TIME THURSDAY, Graysmith falsely stated that Allen wore Wing Walkers similar to those worn by the Zodiac. He also repeated the false claims that Allen knew all of the victims and could be placed at all the crime scenes. During an appearance on LARRY KING LIVE, Graysmith stated that Allen was a suspect who “ was turned in by his family, who knew all the victims, who stalked some of them, who was at some of the crime scenes.”
The paperback version does contain the following change in the final lines of the epilogue: “Stirring up people, getting things accomplished, making a difference, isn't that what books should be about."
Given the evidence, it would appear that Robert Graysmith's books concerning the Zodiac case have stirred people indeed, and he did make a difference. His distorted and erroneous accounts have effectively misinformed the public and obstructed efforts to investigate the still-unsolved crimes.
Phoenix Pictures will soon present a new motion picture based on Graysmith’s books. Actor Jake Gyllenhaal portrays the curious cartoonist obsessed with the unsolved case and his chosen suspect, Arthur Leigh Allen. Critics may wonder whether the actor was “lost in the part” when interviewed about his portrayal of the infamous opportunist. Gyllenhaal told a reporter, “I play Robert Graysmith who is a cartoonist who became obsessed with the case and eventually solved it, even though they never found the Zodiac.”
As facts fade in favor of box office returns, the true story behind the unsolved crimes may be overshadowed by fictitious substitutes and forever lost to history as Robert Graysmith steps over the graves of the Zodiac's victims to reach the spotlight of fame.
A note to the reader:
An earlier version of this article first appeared on the Internet in 2003. Over the years, this author has made repeated attempts to contact Robert Graysmith in hopes of finding explanations for many of the points listed in the article above. Telephone messages to Graysmith went unanswered. Recently, this author again attempted to call Graysmith, and, while in the process of leaving another message on the answering machine, Graysmith picked up the phone.
After explaining that he had been unable to get to the phone sooner because of some household task, Graysmith offered his assistance. This author then asked a question regarding the so-called “Birthday call” to Melvin Belli that was described in Graysmith’s book.
Upon hearing the question, Graysmith’s voice grew weary as he said, “What’s your name again?”
A slight, pregnant pause was followed by regretful recognition of the name. “Oh, I know who you are,” Graysmith replied. “I know all about you. I know what you’re doing. I don’t want to talk about that right now, I’ll, I’ll call you back.”
The line went dead. Of course, Graysmith did not remember to ask for a phone number, although he may have that information on file somewhere after the many previous messages left on his answering machine. In the months since that contact, Graysmith never called to resume the conversation.
The reader is left to wonder if Robert Graysmith will ever be called to account for his crimes against the truth.
Michael Butterfield is a freelance writer living in Chicago, Illinois. All of the information contained in this article can be easily verified using official documents (police reports, FBI files, etc.), public records, and many other sources. Send questions or comments to KKOJAK@aol.com, and visit www.myspace.com/ZODIACDEATHMACHINE for more information.
|Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 1:54 am: |
Excellent and informative post, Michael!
|Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 6:40 am: |
I'll echo Ed's sentiment and say that Graysmith will indeed be called to account, and perhaps sooner than he'd like. All that's needed are some well-written books on the bookseller's shelf to compete with the yellow tome.
|Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 7:52 am: |
Wow. That post should be superglued onto the back of every new Yellowbook published.
Mike, how 'bout an editorial to the local papers once the movie is released?
|Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 1:45 pm: |
You have to get this to the media outlets that will undoubtedly be doing Z specials in conjunction with the movie.
I would start with Bill Kurtis and Court TV.
Keep up the excellent work.
|Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 4:01 pm: |
I forwarded this link to a reporter that I have been speaking to recently. By sheer coincidence, he has very strong ties to Riverside, so he is interested in the case in general. He is not in the Bay Area but I hope that he may know of an investigative reporter who will take on the story of not only Graysmith but of SFPD and the DNA.
One thing that has to happen as a result of the publicity this movie will bring to the case, regardless of any differences that may exist between individual Zodiac researchers and the various theories on Zodiac's identity, is that Graysmith has to be publicly unmasked for his many sins against the facts of the case.
|Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 5:29 pm: |
For my business, I do press releases. If you spend $80 at PRweb.com, trust me - it will be all over the place. Just make sure to time it right.
|Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 12:26 am: |