Did The Zodiac enjoy killing? Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Zodiackiller.com Message Board » General Zodiac Discussion » Did The Zodiac enjoy killing? « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 6:47 am:   

Zodiac was a serial killer only in the sense that he committed a series of killings. He was essentially a mass murderer ("disaffected killer," as I've coined the term) in the mold of a Huberty or a Whitman, whose hold on life was too strong to permit his "going out" in a single incident. It's useless trying to compare him to a recreational killer like Bundy or Rader, whose psychological underpinnings are completely different.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scott_ben
Username: Scott_ben

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 9:08 am:   

A serial killer is defined as a person who commits numerous murders over a period of time, with a cooling off period in between. Where they return to a seemingly normal life

A mass murder is a person who commits multiple murders in a single event.

A spree killer is someone who commits multiple murders over a course of time ranging from a few hours to several days.

The distiction is the cooling off period. That does seem to apply to Zodiac.

The one thing ususally common with all three types of these killers. They are performed by solitary figures or occasionally part of a 2 person team. My point was that Allen to me, did not fit this characteristic. If he infact had long term friendships. I was not infering that Allen killed anyone, actually the opposite. Sorry I didn't explain myself better.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 10:10 am:   

Those distinctions are no good, because they distinguish killers based on quantitative, and not qualitative, assessments. The term "serial killer" is a modern offshoot of what used to be called a "psychopath," a "sociopath," or a "sexual sadist." It has nothing to do with how often he gratifies his sensibilities criminally, but the kind of gratification he receives from murder and the actions ancillary to it. It's a designation that seriously needs to be changed, because it confuses circumstances with motives.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scott_ben
Username: Scott_ben

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 10:53 am:   

Doug,
Hope I can call you, Doug. I don't think the term was coined to designate motive. It was made to link murders to one indivdiual by simialar patterns involved in crimes with no apparent motive.

If you disagree that Zodiac was a serial killer, then by your term you don't think he was a psycopath or sociopath. I don't see that logic.

I could see an arguement that zodiac's crimes were not sexual in nature, although I would disagree with that statement.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 11:08 am:   

I do indeed disagree that Zodiac was a "serial killer." He didn't do anything to his victims except kill them, and it's obvious that his motivation pertained to ego deficiency, envy, and the desire to dwell in the public imagination. All his threats involved mass murder, and the only thing that kept him from achieving the designation was the fact that his victims tended to come in twos, as opposed to threes and fours. I've written extensively on this subject, and my argumentation is available publicly; there's no need to recapitulate it here.

The only thing sex had to do with the Zodiac crimes was the fact that his victims appeared to him to be indulging in it, while he himself wasn't getting any.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 2:37 pm:   

I don't think a person has to engage in sex in order to be a sexual sadist. There are many perverse creatures out there who get off (sexually) on many different things seemingly unrelated to sex. Zodiac attacked the female victims more violently and with an apparent glee. Zodiac wrote letters describing his acts and the victim's suffering. He was not, nor did he, go out with a bang like Whitman. Killing was his pastime, his recreation. He did not plan to die. If Zodiac wasn't a serial killer, then neither was Bundy.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 2:48 pm:   

He did not attack the females more violently and with apparent glee. He shot Betty Lou Jensen a number of times because that's what it took to kill her. He didn't do anything to Darlene Ferrin that he didn't do to Mike Mageau; in fact, he did more and worse to Mageau who lucked out and stayed alive. There was no "glee" expressed at all; he just did the deed silently and left. Cecilia Shepard was stabbed only a few more times than Brian Hartnell because unlike Hartnell she didn't lie still and take being stabbed, but rolled around and resisted. Far from having stabbed her "with glee," Hartnell recalls Zodiac's nervousness during the assault, which could hardly have lasted a minute. He didn't tease his victims, play with them, sexually assail them, torture them, or do anything else but kill them, in events that took no more than a minute to transpire.

Does anyone really know anything about the Zodiac case, apart from the common misconceptions that have surrounded it for decades? I'm beginning to wonder.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 3:08 pm:   

--He did not attack the females more violently--

Yes, he did. That is why they died and the men lived. He didn't have to do anything but kill them, because killing them was sexually gratifying to him.

In Zodiac's own words:

"I like killing people because it is so much fun."

"To kill something gives me the most thrilling experience. It is even better than getting your rocks off with a girl."

Who has the misconception here?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 3:53 pm:   

Exactly Yarbchris. And no one knows what went on with the Jensen/Faraday murders. He hit her five times in a close pattern striking vital organs. For all we know he could have taunted Jensen and told her to run for it or he would shoot her and when she started to flee he gleefully emptied his gun into her back laughing the whole while.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kevin
Username: Kevin

Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 4:55 pm:   

No, he did not attack the females more violently. He intended to kill the males as much as he did the females, it just didn't always work out that way. Obviously, Douglas understands the case better than the last two posters. There is a very tight timeline on the murders and he didn't have time to jack around with the victims.

You might want to order and read Kelleher's "This is Zodiac Speaking." This to me was the most down to earth, no hype book on the Zodiac I've ever read.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kevin
Username: Kevin

Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 4:58 pm:   

I should add, why is hitting her in the back five times as she fled any more violent that having a gun put up to your head and having your brains blown out point blank as he did TWICE with the males? The "attacking females" thing is a myth.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 5:06 pm:   

Douglas wasn't thewre Kevin and neither were you. You don't know how it went down with the Jensen/Faraday case. You are only going on assumptions and pretending to understand the case more than other posters here with your condescending attitute.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 7:44 pm:   

Intentions are one thing, attention is another. His attention was focused on the females, that is why the males were so "lucky." Yes, he killed males, too. He got off on killing. Any crime scene profiler or investigator will tell you that multiple attacks (gunshots or stabbing) indicate a more passionate means of murder than a single shot or stab.

I haven't accused anyone of having an inferior understanding. I think Douglas is one of the more intelligent posters on this board. I have looked at the information provided on this website, and others, as well as the books that are out there. From everything I have seen, it is more than obvious that Zodiac attacked the female victims with much more vigor and energy than the males. He attacked males, too, but he was nervous around females. If you disagree that is fine. I see no reason to label my (or anyone else's) understanding as inferior. You believe what you want to. If you disagree, -present some facts supporting your contention. It will be more convincing than an attack on my knowledge.

--------

The Confession letter is very sexual in nature. In it the author describes his plan to display his future victims genitalia, as well as speaking of his victims breasts. The letter also points to a motive for some of his murders.

No, Zodiac didn't spend much time at the scene of his crimes. He took souvenirs and wrote letters to relive his "experience."

I never said that Zodiac did not enjoy killing males --he obviously did. I only said that he enjoyed the attacks on females more so. Real live girls made him nervous. Hartnell said that he went "hog wild" on Shepard; going into "some type of frenzy". He seemed to have concentrated his attack on her groin area.

The police report for the Lake Herman Road attacks shows that the attacker similarly concentrated the attack on the groin area.

Even Michael D. Kelleher says (in the book Kevin recommends) that "It is as if violence had replaced the act of sexual intercourse." There are many other references to Zodiac connections of sex and violence in the book, as well.

If Zodiac didn't enjoy killing, why did he brag so much about his crimes? If his crimes weren't sexual in nature, why did he compare them to sex?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 7:47 pm:   

Rather than me proving the negative, I'd challenge anyone else who thinks that Zodiac killed the female victims with "glee" to prove the positive. And I don't know what you mean, Yarbchris, when you assert that the women died and the men lived. Two men lived, the first because Zodiac was only half-competent with handguns, and the second because the male was bigger, more robust, and didn't put up much of a fight.

I think I've developed much more of an appreciation for what poor Tom Voigt has to deal with on a day-to-day basis. He goes well out of his way to unearth documents that explain in plain black-and-white what the Zodiac did, and he gets trumped by Graysmith on his own message board every time by people who place idle speculation on a par with informed thought.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vallejo_dave
Username: Vallejo_dave

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 8:01 pm:   

I would like to say that I think Doug and Deo are 2 of the greatest minds on this board, besides myself, lol. Their take on the case just blows me away!

I think the Faraday-Jensen shooting was a local thing. Why try to insure that she was dead, as she was running away? If the Zodiac persona did this as a random act of suspected sexual partners, he could have shot them both as they exited the car. Why did he make sure he got her as she was running away?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Deoxys
Username: Deoxys

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 8:56 pm:   

Thanks, my friend, but I'm still not going to wear your nice buttons. :-) As interesting and worthwhile as this discussion may be, it really has nothing to do with Arthur Leigh Allen's will. The will is another nifty find by Tom and deserves it's own discussion, IMO.

How 'bout somebody starting a thread along the lines of "Did Zodiac enjoy killing?" I know Doug and Ed have interesting ideas on the subject and it would get us back on the subject of this thread.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jim_t
Username: Jim_t

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 9:06 pm:   

Don't underestimate yourself Dave, you are one of the most knowledgeable posters on the board about the bay area and your info is esteemed. Why would Huffman get Allen's clothes in fact who would want them besides the Goodwill? What happened to Allen's things that were taken by the police when they searched his house? I know they kept them as evidence, but after he died, why would they need them anymore. Also does anyone know what type of Buick did Allen's brother give to him. Allen must have been devastated by his Brother Ron's purchase of the Honda automobiles.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 9:25 pm:   

Once again, more bombastic grumbling, no attempt at proof; more condescension, no bedrock for your claims. Can you back up what you say in any way besides pronouncing how "informed" you are(and how ignorant the rest of us are)? I am beginning to doubt it. Of course, the Zodiac being a sexual sadist, as he has been profiled, wouldn't be very convenient for some.

Back on the subject of ALA's will;
Did he leave anything to Kaczynski?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kevin
Username: Kevin

Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 11:46 pm:   

So Yarbchris, are you telling the board that the Zodiac wrote the Riverside confession letter?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vallejo_dave
Username: Vallejo_dave

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 8:29 am:   

Jim t-Thanks for the compliment. I think it's obvious that Z enjoyed the killing attack, he just wasen't good at killing consistently. By the time of Stine, he wanted to make sure. I think Kevin has some good points about this also.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 8:39 am:   

If Zodiac enjoyed killing, he enjoyed it in the way that any one of us might enjoy beating the dickens out of someone who had done something egregiously bad to injure us. I once had the "pleasure" of administering a sound thrashing to some jackass who attacked me when I came between him and the woman he was abusing. The process itself was anything but enjoyable, and I hope I never have to go through it again. On the other hand, I felt a great deal of satisfaction inwardly in having given the bugger what he had coming, and to that extent, I enjoyed it.

I strongly believe that Zodiac felt the same way about his killings. There's no evidence to show that he enjoyed the process, but quite a bit of evidence to suggest that his primary source of satisfaction (apart from publicity) consisted in getting revenge against a class of people who were sullying his haunts by their trysting. That's the way he would have rationalized it, and he bore it out with his continued allusions to Ko-Ko in The Mikado. Ko-ko's official function is as the arbiter of morality in the town of Titipu--executing all those caught in the act of "flirting."

Of course the desire to "clean up" society would only have served as a smokescreen for Zodiac's true motivation, which was envy against a class of persons publicly enjoying their sexuality--a pleasure that he undoubtedly didn't share; hence the envy, and the desire to take vengeance against a subset of that class.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 9:31 am:   

Doug, thanks for finally offering an intelligent response. I think your point of view is expressed much clearer now. I agree with your last post with one exception. I believe there is evidence that indicates his enjoyment of the process, including pseudosexual gratification from his attacks. I realize you disagree; but as you have those who share your opinion, I am certainly not alone in my assessment, either.

As of for the author of the confession letter, I admit I cannot say with all certainty that it was the Zodiac. That being said, the confession letter is not the only leg supporting my contention.

I can open up a whole new can of worms by saying that I believe Sherwood Morrill was over-rated. How relevant that statement is to this discussion is another question. Perhaps I, or someone else should start a new thread.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 9:45 am:   

Yarbchris, you should use the evidence at hand to explain why you think as you do.

The Bates affair opens a big can of worms so far as the Zodiac case is concerned, but there is a significant body of evidence to suggest that the two were related. The tenor of the writing style doesn't seem to support it, but elements such as the lower-case, dotted I's (which appear on the Halloween card) militate somewhat for a connection.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vallejo_dave
Username: Vallejo_dave

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 10:32 am:   

"I hearby bequeath my iron rabbit traps to Theodore Kaczynski. Use them well in Montana, Ted."----ALA
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 10:35 am:   

If you have read my posts, I have explained why I believe what I do. I believe Zodiac expressed as much in his letters. I believe police reports and other documents indicate an attacker obsessed with female genitalia. These documents indicate a concentrated effort by the Zodiac to penetrate that area of the female body. I am certain there are FBI profilers and psychologists that have reached a similar conclusion. (Not to mention the famous--infamous? cartoonist with whom I hold a multitude of disagreements.)
Certainly, all of Zodiac's victims were not female. That fact lends to my agreement with your previous post concerning his possible motivation. This, imho, does not rule out the possibility that Zodiac received some sort of sexual gratification from his attacks. Whether all of his attacks were sexual in this manner, or just the attacks on female victims, is, like so many aspects of the Zodiac case, very much debatable.

If you meant more evidence to explain my beliefs on Morrill, perhaps another thread is in order. I will gladly start one next week. I am rather limited for time at the moment.

A Merry Christmas to all.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 9:40 pm:   

I'm not certain that Z was "attacker obsessed with female genitalia," considering that out of 7 victims (4 males and 3 females), 2 males survived, 2 males were shot in the head, 1 female was shot in the back, 1 female was shot in her upper body, and 1 female was stabbed 5 times in the back and 5 times in the front of her body, with apparently one stab wound to the lower abdomen (LB Report, p. 24 paragraph 5, LB DOJ Report, page 17, page 18 and page 19). Unless I missed something somewhere, we have 1 victim out of 7 who suffered a single stabwound that was low enough to nick her liver, and that's it. It looks like Z was more interested in killing quickly and efficiently (of which he did neither very well) and was not "obsessed with female genitalia" in any way, shape or form. Who said that, and why? The evidence says nothing of the sort that I can see...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hawk
Username: Hawk

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 9:12 am:   

Since we don't know who Z is/was then all we can do is compare him to a known killer with the same MO. IMHO that would be David Berkowitz.

Berkowitz confessed to Robert Ressler that his reason for killing was do to his inability to have a relationship with women and to get back at his mother. He also claimed that hunting for victims was erotic to him. He would masturbate after each attack. "it is more fun than getting your rocks off with a girl".

Berkowitz also told Ressler that if he couldn't find anyone to kill while hunting, then he would go back to his previous crimescenes and relive them. Just seeing dried blood drops or a chalk outline would arouse him. I often wondered if Z may have been standing in the background of some of the news footage of his crimescenes.

He also stabbed a 15 year old girl six times. Luckly she survived.

If I was to wager a bet on it, I would say Zodiac hated women for the same reason Berkowitz did.

I think Z went to SF to kill a couple parked in a prominent neighborhood like the Presidio to prove to the Bay area that everyones vulnerable but couldn't find any, thus he simply settled for a cab driver which is one of the most high risk jobs there is next to prostitution.

So yes I think Z enjoyed killing.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vallejo_dave
Username: Vallejo_dave

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 9:42 am:   

I agree with Ed and Hawk, as usual. I don't see any female genitalia connection to Z's attacks at all. Even if he did Bates, there was no genitalia attack there either. If he did D&E, there was a wound and activity with the breasts, but no genitalia wounds.

BTW, A friend of mine got picked up at the NY, PA, NJ border in the 70's because he looked like the Son of Sam composite. Talk about embarrassment!

Happy Xmass to all!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 11:29 am:   

(Please note: My viewpoint is based on the collective documents of suspected cases, as well as confirmed. Even though I have spent some time studying this case (and consider myself quite familiar with it), I readily admit I am in the process of developing my own theories regarding the Zodiac. As I have no favorite suspect at this time, I also have chosen no definite victims. I believe that even if certain events are ruled out as Zodiac attacks, there still isn't enough reason to discard my theory. I think the classic definition of sexual sadist is a bit misleading in as far as what I am trying to convey. I think a more accurate label to pin on the Zodiac would be "pseudosexual behavior;" that is, one who replaces the act of sex with something else. In this case, I would say that the Zodiac replaces sex with violence. I don't know if this term has ever been used before, or if there is another term a psychologist might use instead. Perhaps it is a bit presumptuous for an untrained person as myself to label someone anyway. Too late, its done.

Zodiac was nervous around females, perhaps in fear of them, even when he was in control. Yes, his goal was to kill as quickly as possible (both male and female) before leaving the scene. However, when the opportunity presented itself, Zodiac went for less lethal blows to the areas of the female anatomy that he feared most. I strongly believe that his perverted views of sex were a major motivation behind his attacks. I believe he killed women because he felt rejected by them and killed men because they enjoyed what he could not.
-----
Hartnell stated suspect said, "I'm getting nervous." This was when suspect was tying Miss Shepard's hands, In fact Hartnell stated suspect got real shaky when he was tying Miss Shepard's hands.

when Miss Shepard turned her body over (on back), suspect stabbed her in the lower abdomen. victim stated suspect stabbed miss Shepard much worse than him. suspect went into some kind of frenzy when stabbing Miss Shepard.

Src: http://www.zodiackiller.com/LBReport24.html
-------
(Ranger Sgt.) White stated that he noticed a lot of blood in the girl's groin area.

Src: http://www.zodiackiller.com/LBReport7.html
--------
BUT I SHALL CUT OF HER FEMALE PARTS AND DEPOSIT THEM FOR THE WHOLE CITY TO SEE. - HER BREAST FELT VERY WARM AND FIRM UNDER MY HANDS, BUT ONLY ONE THING WAS ON MY MIND.

Src: http://www.zodiackiller.com/FBIConfession.html
-------
"I like killing people because it is so much fun."

"To kill something gives me the most thrilling experience. It is even better than getting your rocks off with a girl."

Src: http://www.zodiackiller.com/VTHCipher.html

http://www.zodiackiller.com/ChronicleCipher.html
-------
Edwards was placed face up on top of Domingos and the top of her bathing suit was cut open with a sharp instrument (probably a knife), exposing her breasts.

Src: http://www.zodiackiller.com/DomingosEdwards.html
-------

Very little to go on, I know. I don't expect any mass conversions to yarbchristianity. There is also my own "hunch factor" at play. I do believe there is enough evidence to develop a theory.

I am sure some will disagree with my assessment. I expect and welcome any debate; It sharpens my reasoning skills. While I may seem arrogant and opinionated, I learn something new everyday. I also believe thorough discussion can sometimes shed light on areas that are sometimes left in the dark. While some of you old hands may consider me a "noob," I hope I can offer a fresh perspective--if not now, possibly in the future. I was a visitor to Tom's site long before I started posting, long before I purchased YB, BB, and many other books on the subject matter. I discovered this board (and Tom's site) when I purchased some files from Tom's website that I was slow in receiving from another vendor. (I have a site of my own where I am researching this and other unrelated cases.)
While I found Graysmith's work to be interesting, my cynical nature questioned a lot of his conclusions. Even though I credit Graysmith for igniting the interest in this case, there is no doubt that Tom is the major force in keeping the interest alive. I understand Ed plays a large role in keeping things ship-shape, as well. I respect a lot of you guys here on the board, though my hard head may lead me in opposite directions.

Enough of my rambling, and back "in the ring." (I just saw the new Rocky movie.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_voigt
Username: Tom_voigt

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 11:53 am:   

There are but four definite Zodiac attacks, yet more than 20 letters.

I'd say he used murder as a platform to get attention via his letters.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colette
Username: Colette

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 12:10 pm:   

Killing couples in lover's lanes or cozy on the beach could have a sexual motive. I think he really LIKED murder but later LOVED all the media attention.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 12:12 pm:   

Zodiac did claim as many as 37 murders.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_voigt
Username: Tom_voigt

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 12:21 pm:   

Yarbchris, Zodiac claimed lots of things that weren't true, beginning in his very first letters (July 31, 1969).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 2:05 pm:   

I see where your perspective is coming from Yarbchris. I think, however, that it's a mistake to include crimes that aren't attributable to Zodiac, like the Bates murder and the Domingos/Edwards murder. Also, you need to separate the things a person says from the things a person does. Zodiac says he likes killing; he says it's more fun than getting his rocks off with a girl, but the physical evidence suggests something quite the opposite, as I've detailed above. Contrast also his Little List Letter, where he goes into an accounting of all the horrid things he's going to do with the people he's already had under his control, in some indefinable future state, with what he actually did in the event, which was essentially, nothing (other than dealing death).

I think the same reasoning can be applied to Hawk's observations about Berkowitz. While his case has some similarities to the Zodiac case, there are major differences as well. Perhaps we could do a little thought-experiment, and ask ourselves how Berkowitz would have acted if he had been organized enough to get a pair of victims in the same position as Zodiac managed to get Hartnell and Shepard in at Lake Berryessa. We know how Zodiac reacted--he did absolutely nothing to avail himself of a situation where he had both victims hog-tied and immobile, in an isolated place where he could have worked his will on them more-or-less at his leisure.

You can take that scenario and analyze it in synergy not only with the other events, but with such facets of his career as the ability to stop killing when killing grew too risky--supplanting murder with a series of idle threats, and correspondences that grew less sinister with each missive, until they came across as little more than sardonic jokes.

In the final analysis, I think Tom has it essentially right, namely, that Zodiac murdered to facilitate his need for publicity. To that assessment I would add that I think his initial impulse to kill was the desire to assuage his hostility against a class of victims who were enjoying something that he desired very strongly but couldn't attain, namely, sexual fulfillment. (To that extent there is a sexual element to the crimes, but it's not the same type of sexual element that drives a sexual sadist). Once he achieved a certain level of vengeance, and once things started getting too hot for him in terms of risk, he was able very easily to back off and be content with the publicity element of his signature.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hawk
Username: Hawk

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 2:52 pm:   

Doug, that was very well put.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 7:48 pm:   

Thank you, Hawk.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 8:50 pm:   

Bates and Domingos/Edwards aside, Zodiac's words and deceptions aside, Berkowitz aside; Let's take the confirmed Zodiac LB attack:

Zodiac has both a gun and a knife. His victims are on their bellies, tied up, prone and vulnerable. Does Zodiac take a knife to their throat dealing a slash of near instant death? Does he shoot them in the head, execution style with his gun?

No, he does not. The Zodiac instead stabs them in the back, prolonging their suffering rather than going for the obvious quick kill. He does this while wearing a costume he designed for engaging in such a ritual. Why the get-up if he planned on quickly killing his victims? Why did he want his victims, the only ones to actually see his costume, to view such a morbid disguise if his only plan was to simply kill?

His crime was sexually motivated. He had fantasies about his attacks prior to performing them. When he did attack, the fear and pain inflicted by him brought sadistic pleasure. He would relive this pleasure by writing his letters. Like a pubescent teenager bragging of sexual escapades, Zodiac wanted to boast of his attacks, his "conquests."

All of his talk about prison escape and robbery was just a pretext to get his victims where he wanted them. He wanted them to be in a position where he could kill them with multiple blows from his knife. He wanted the experience to last a little bit longer than a single gunshot to the head would provide. He wanted to hear the screams and see their horror. This is what pleased the Zodiac. This is what drove him.

When he chose victims in a vehicle, he did so because being in a parked car made them sitting ducks. He did not have the option of using a knife in these cases, the victim(s) could fight him off or the second one could escape while he was attacking the first. In these events, he used a gun.

Did Zodiac really quit killing, or did he:

1.Die?
2.Become incarcerated or institutionalized?
3.Change location?

There are many unsolved murders out there, in California and across the country. There are more bodies lying undiscovered. (For all we know, there may even be other unpublished Zodiac letters.) The Zodiac may have stopped writing to protect his identity, but he would continue to kill as long as he was able, as long as it brought him the gratification he craved. It was the act of killing that he enjoyed.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Monday, December 25, 2006 - 2:15 am:   

YC, once you remove Z's written claims and the two unsubstantiated Z attacks, all we are left with is a single stab wound in the lower abdomen of one female victim out of a total of 7 victims, and a line of reasoning that has it's basis in the yellow book (ie, the Z crimes were sexually motivated). Other than Z's claims and profilers' assumptions, there is really nothing on which to base a theory that Z was an "attacker obsessed with female genitalia" and that he committed murder for sexual satisfaction.

Of course, it's a theory as good as anyone else's, especially when we consider that Z has not been arrested and has not told us the real reason(s) for his crimes. I'm not even certain that Z enjoyed killing, rather, I think that, like his demonstrable incompetence with relatively simple weaponry (come on, how does one fail to immediately kill 2 bound & helpless victims with a knife when you are on top of them??? Methinks Z would just as likely have shot or stabbed himself by accident had he committed more crimes), the 6 months between LHR and BRS suggests to me that Z may have been sickened by murder, but continued with his crimes for reasons that were important to him. And his claims of enjoyment of murder may have been nothing more than a meaningless boast.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kevin
Username: Kevin

Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Monday, December 25, 2006 - 4:54 am:   

Yarbchris, I recommend you read Kelleher, it seems you haven't. I am sure if you do, you'll come back here with a completely different outlook. Honestly, this is one of the *least* sexually motivated cases out there.

If I could sum his motivation in just a few words, it would be that he was an attention whore who wanted to prove he was smarter than everyone else, especially the cops. He liked the game and the challenge and didn't care or even want to know who the victims were. Each known crime was thought out prior for maximum "in your face" effect. It had very little to do with sex, genitalia, etc.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 12:49 pm:   

It is as if violence had replaced the act of sexual intercourse -p21

He may be intensely jealous of the sexual intimacy of' couples and hunts them for that reason. -p51

Zodiac was probably not driven by a bizarre, twisted sexual compulsion in the ordinary understanding of such a motivation. ..." -p59

However, in both cases it was the female victim that drew his strongest reaction -p60

His crime signature gave evidence that the killer focused most of his wrath against the female victims -p64

My impression is that this repeated penetration expresses deep rage and perhaps is also tinged by some sexual expression. -p72

Once again, the killer focused his rage on the female victim and once again the male victim survived. .. -p74

The pattern of Zodiac's attacks seem to indicate that even though he targeted female victims for the brunt of his wrath, it was their male companions that he feared most. -p87

perhaps just as relevant in this case, the adolescent male who boasts about the number of his sexual conquests. -p98

This raises the question as to whether he also derives some kind of sexual gratification from killing. That would be another reason for stabbing a victim so many times-because it felt so good to the killer. -p107

Zodiac's attacks were not overtly sexual in nature (although this may have been an indirect motivation), and he spent very little time with his victims, -p181

The sense of power, intimidation , and complete domination of the teenagers would have been tantamount to an orgasmic experience for the killer-a substitute for the completely absent or exceptionally painful sexual encounters of his past life. -p223

Above excerpts from "This is the Zodiac Speaking" Michael D. Kelleher and David Van Nuys

I will concede that there were other motivations besides sex in the Zodiac murders. However, I feel it is unwise to discount the role that Zodiac's violence played in his own sexual desire. I feel very strongly that his attacks, especially against women, were substitutes for the sex he could not have. I think Kelleher has expressed some degree of recognition of this, as well, as indicated above. As much as it may appear, I am not trying to put Zodiac in the same league as Kemper and Carpenter (as the F.B.I. apparently has), though I do find there are some similarities that cannot be ignored.

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Post as "Anonymous"
Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration