Zodiackiller.com Message Board: Arthur Leigh Allen: Zodiac (Allen?) had never lied concerning his activities.

The psychologist retained by the S.F.P.D. had advised the police that this particular individual relied on the attention that the media was giving him. And if this attention was to stop, then he would have no fuel for continuing his actions.
So, there was an attempt to give as little attention as possible to his writings and discredit his letters. This ofcourse only angered him. Remember he even wrote to the papers complaining of such. The plain and simple fact is he was almost always truthful as to his deeds.
There were always subtle clues within these writings. Let me give you an example..
The last known Zodiac victim was Paul Stine. But, what of this case? Why him? Why that particular person place or thing? Simple. In his writings concerning the murder of Stine, Zodiac gives information as to the precise circumstances of this murder. But why does he make what seems to be simple mistake concerning the cross street of Washington Street? He states that it is Maple when in fact it is Cherry where Stine was killed. This mistake was no mistake. His original plan was to kill Stine at Washington and Maple but there was a man walking his dog at this very corner. The cabbie was told to drive to the next corner (Cherry St.) The most obvious reason that Maple St. was so important to him was that at this corner is a nice stately mansion known as the "Le Petit Trianon" The little getaway. This home was an exact reproduction of Marie Antoinette's home in Verseilles. Although a little smaller I was told. He had been here on a few occasions when they would throw marvelous parties. If you were to investigate the long line of victims after Stine, You would see these subtle references to his writings. The next victim was Marie Antoinette Anstey of Vallejo. Abducted while driving her car home after visiting her parents. Her vehicle was found at an animal shelter blocking the driveway. Her body was found in an "interesting" manner and nude in Lake County. face-down. She was drowned in a stream due to gravel and sand in her lungs. But, not found near any body of water. An erring missing from her left ear. Hum... Sounds a little like the deaths of several other women, includind the "missing left erring" throughout Sonoma county and in San Francisco at several schools. Did you know that Arthur Leigh Allen knew several of these victims? He attnded Sonoma State College with Eva L. Blau. She was found dead not very far from his traier. He met Kim Wendy Allen while his sister-in-law worked at the school in Santa Rosa. I was allowed to review the coroner files of all unsolved female homocides in Sonoma county.There is a definite SUSPECT-VICTIM RELATIONSHIP here. Unfortunately the police were a bit slow at learning this. As they were unable to solve the ciphers that the Harden's were able to.
I have much more, but I am a little fatigued at the moment. I will visit this message board again soon. Thanks . Christen Iman

Christen,
Since the Stine murder seemed to intentionally set the stage for Zodiac's "kiddie" threat, I've always felt the crime scene (Washington and Maple) was chosen because, among other reasons, it is a school crosswalk. (Plus it's just a few houses from a grade school.)

Marie Antoinette Anstey was not a murder victim.
In December 1998, during a visit to the Bay Area, I uncovered some info about what really happened to her:
Having been partying (booze and drugs) at the Coronado Inn with friends that included members of the Hell's Angels motorcycle gang, the group decided to head to Lake Berryessa. Once at the lake, a very-high Anstey began swimming naked. She accidentally hit her head on a rock and drowned.
Thinking she could be saved, the group attempted to rush her to a hospital. Realizing she was dead and scared of possible problems with law enforcement, the group left her body where it was later found by police.

Christen wrote:
"The plain and simple fact is he was almost always truthful as to his deeds."

This isn't quite true. Starting from the top, Z's identity was not in his first code, as claimed in his cover letter to the Chronicle and his early August letter. He lied about leaving BRS inconspicuously -- both Mageau and George Bryant reported that he sped off at a high rate of speed. He probably lied about the black man who saw him making the call in Vallejo -- no such man was ever identified or located, and in any case he didn't tell the police that Z's car was brown.

The Zodiac lied about his fingerprint guards, leaving prints on several letters and at crime scenes. He lied about his other murders, alluded to in the box scores closing his later letters. He lied about both of the bus bombs, about shooting someone in a parked car with a .38, and about the murder in Riverside.

Z used the truth occasionally, but after the Stine murder he began making outlandish claims that are obviously prevarications. I wouldn't take him at his word, that's for sure.

--Jake
http://members.aol.com/Jakewark/index.html
"This is the Zodiac Speaking..."

Christen wrote:

His original plan was to kill Stine at Washington and Maple but there was a man walking his dog at this very corner. The cabbie was told to drive to the next corner (Cherry St.)

How do you know that? Stine never told anyone (he was dead), and Z never wrote about it in his letters. Did such a person (like the nonexistent eyewitness to Z's call to VPD) ever come forward?

Christen also wrote:

Did you know that Arthur Leigh Allen knew several of these victims? He attnded Sonoma State College with Eva L. Blau. She was found dead not very far from his traier. He met Kim Wendy Allen while his sister-in-law worked at the school in Santa Rosa.

How do you know this? What is your source of information for these claims?

As far as Allen attending Sonoma State with a certain victim(s), so what? I attended Sonoma State also, along with about 6,000 other students, and you know what? I didn't know 99%(or more) of them. Therefore, what are the odds he actually knew any of the Santa Rosa victims? And I bet a pedophile like Allen didn't associate with the female students there much, they would have been a little too old for his taste.

Yeah, now we know for sure. Sonoma State?
I knew there were rumours but isn't this another clue that EdN. is the Zodiac-killer?
(Hahahaha)

Eduard, there's more... Raymond Burr (Perry Mason/Ironside) was awarded an honorary doctorate and gave the commencement speech there just three months (as I recall) before he died, and he was also a boyhood friend of Z-suspect Jack Beeman. Now, me, a (part-time) Z-investigator, attended that university also. Weird, huh? What is it they say about a "small world?"

It's a small world for sure.
Look at how late you posted and how late I posted after you!

Just noticed this: on Oct 9, Jake wrote:

"The Zodiac lied about his fingerprint guards, leaving prints on several letters and at crime scenes."

And when compared with Allen's, who had to have been printed repeatedly throughout his career, the result was . . . ?

PeterH

Peterh wrote:
"And when compared with Allen's, who had to have been printed repeatedly throughout his career, the result was . . . ?"

Goose egg. Zilch. Nada. The donut. No match.

Incidentally, I have it on the FBI's authority (Laboratory Work Sheet dated 2/27/91) that not only was Allen checked against the cab prints, which some folks maintain are of dubious origin, but also against prints from the 3-page letter of August '69, which were almost certainly left by the Zodiac.

--Jake
http://members.aol.com/Jakewark/index.html
"This is the Zodiac Speaking..."

So why so much attention still on Allen? Perhaps because he did one or more of the crimes, say Berryessa, but did not send the letters?

There is no reason to believe Zodiac's prints were on any of the letters, IMHO.
Not only did Zodiac have as much time as he wanted to prepare them, as sloppily as this investigation was handled at times, it wouldn't surprise me if the prints on the letter were Hoover's.

Tom wrote:
"There is no reason to believe Zodiac's prints were on any of the letters, IMHO."

No reason? None at all, Tom? Not even the reason that ... the Zodiac wrote them? Admittedly, the chance that the prints belong to a newspaperman do exist, but just how many allowances is an objective reader supposed to make for suspects like Allen and Kaczynski, whose status as printed convicts all but rules them out as likely candidtes?

"....it wouldn't surprise me if the prints on the letter were Hoover's."

Here's a nugget from the FBI files. It's a handwritten letter received by the Bureau on 6/18/70:

"I would like some information on the 'Zodiac Killer.' And if his real name and birthdate is known. Could you also send something about where and when he killed or more information, if possible. Could you also send an autograph and fingerprint of J. Edgar Hoover."

The signature is blacked out, but doesn't this diction sound like our notorious German friend Stromjunkie?

--Jake
http://members.aol.com/Jakewark/index.html
"This is the Zodiac Speaking..."

Nobody would be happier than I at the prospect of Zodiac being an unknown suspect.
It's just hard for me to believe the guy would have left prints on his letters.

In my opinion Zodiac would not have left prints on his letters unless he had been unaware that prints can be lifted from paper. But in that event, the letters and envelopes should have been covered with prints.

Jake wrote:

The signature is blacked out, but doesn't this diction sound like our notorious German friend Stromjunkie?

He was old enough and interested in the case 30 years ago? Wouldn't surprise me.

I have to agree with Tom about the prints. While Z was not the Fantomas-like genius the media, notably Graysmith, made him out to be, he was no simpleton either. Fingerprinting was a given if he was ever apprehended, and he would have safeguarded against this event. Gloves!
If Z was behind the LB murder, wouldn't it be reasonable to suppose that a guy who was willing to concoct a bizarre 'Unknown Comedian meets Ko Ko'-type costume, would go to the trouble of buying gloves?
Z was just very lucky that he committed his crimes when he did, as he would have been caught in this day and age. If this message appears twice, I apologize (e-mail problem).
Oscar.
p.s. Gareth Penn in 2004! Ride the wave.

Oscar wrote:
"wouldn't it be reasonable to suppose that a guy who was willing to concoct a bizarre 'Unknown Comedian meets Ko Ko'-type costume, would go to the trouble of buying gloves?"

It doesn't say anything about gloves in the initial interview with Hartnell, but this doesn't mean Z wasn't wearing them, just that no one thought to ask.

However, Napa police found a still-damp palmprint on the receiver of the pay phone that Z used to call in the Berryessa murder. It was off the hook when they arrived, indicating that no one since Z had used it. Maybe Z was wearing gloves, but they were too bulky to dial with -- but don't you usually dial with the hand you aren't using to hold the receiver?

This isn't to say that Z necessarily went to Berryessa barehanded. Maybe he put on the gloves for the attack, then took them off for the one time he was actually touching something the police could dust for his prints.

--Jake
http://members.aol.com/Jakewark/index.html
"This is the Zodiac Speaking..."

Jake,
What was the estimated time between the arrival of the police at the phone booth in question, and the time of the call? Who is to say that somebody else didn't intervene (depending on your answer to the aforementioned question of course)? Also, Zodiac may have placed the phone between his shoulder and jaw, therby allowing him to easily remove his gloves to dial the number.
I eagerly await your response telling me that I am full of goat-dip!
Slave to the Grind,
Oscar.
p.s. Penn in 2004. Ride the wave!

Oscar: Z made his call to NPD at 7:40 PM. According to "Authorities Seek 'Madman'" by L. Pierce Carson (The Napa Register, 9-29-1969, p. 2A):

Operators said that the call came from a pay phone with a 255 prefix, and KVON News Director, Pat Stanley, who was at the sheriff's office when the call came in, found the phone the caller used. It was a pay phone at Napa Car Wash, 1231 Main St. Officers dusted the phone for prints.

Unfortunately, we are not given a time frame, but I don't imagine that more than ten or fifteen minutes elapsed between tracing the call and Pat Stanley finding the phone booth (incidentally, the phone booth is no longer there, and the car wash is now a parking lot). If Harry Martin's ridiculous "theory" is to be believed (ahem), then there is the possibility that the print was not even Z's. According to "Zodiac," p. 25:

According to information received by the Sentinel several weeks ago, a Napa State Hospital inmate on a weekend pass, used the phone booth around the same time as the killer of Cecilia Shepherd (sic) did on September 27, 1969. The inmate was seen at the phone booth by a Napa State Hospital employee that same day. If a palm print was found, was it the killer's or the inmates? (sic)

Even though Martin's research is typically sloppy and confused, and he changes his basic theory from page to page, he has brought up an important point. Whether it was an inmate from the hospital or not is irrelevant, because the partial palm print could have been left by anyone, including Z.

Ok, so the prints are out, since they could be a newspaperman's or a mental patient's. The handwriting is out, because it had been published. The description is out, because all the witnesses gave different heights and weights. No suspect can be ruled in or out by any standard.

Oy vey! I'm going back to the JFK board!

--Jake
http://members.aol.com/Jakewark/index.html
"This is a waste of time..."

Jake: that means that absolutely nothing can be trusted then! I think my theory from another post might have been correct after all: the Z crimes were really nothing but a bunch of unrelated criminals copycatting each other's MO's, signatures and writing and trying to pass their crimes off as someone else's. No wonder this thing can't be solved! Now that we have solved the mystery as to why it can't be solved, maybe we should turn to some other infamous unsolved crimes and apply this irrefutable logic to them and solve them!

Hmm... contrary to what I opined some time back, that means that, since the crimes look just a little bit different, Z can't possibly have been Jack the Ripper, the Axeman of New Orleans, the Torso Killer, the Phantom of Texarkana, and I guess that means he won't be returning to LHR to kill two teens on their first date on 12-20-2068 to celebrate the 100th anniversary of when he first started collecting slaves for his afterlife.

Now that I've gotten that out of my system (with tongue firmly planted in cheek), kinda makes you wonder where some of these bizarre ideas come from. I think that, back here in the real world, we can safely assume that the accepted Z crimes are still really Z crimes.