Either/Or? Both/And?

Zodiackiller.com Message Board: Arthur Leigh Allen: Either/Or? Both/And?

By Jake (Jake) (spider-mtc-tg021.proxy.aol.com - on Saturday, April 27, 2002 - 10:06 pm:

What's the consensus among Allen proponents on the Santa Rosa murders? Did he do them and the Zodiac murders? Do we allow suspicion of the one as evidence of the other? Or does the vast divergence in MO and signature rule out a single perp? This isn't a trick question: it's the result of a rereading of ZU, a good chunk of which is devoted to implicating ALA in those murders.


By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (12-224-186-54.client.attbi.com - on Saturday, April 27, 2002 - 10:28 pm:

Allen's as good a candidate as any for the SR murders, even if he wasn't the Zodiac. He was a pervert who was strong, wiley, knew the area, loved to taunt, and attended SSU.

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (spider-ntc-ta074.proxy.aol.com - on Saturday, April 27, 2002 - 11:27 pm:

I believe Allen could have committed those murders and should very well be regarded as a suspect. Actually, that's pretty ironic when you consider the fact that I don't believe that ALA and/or the Zodiac had anything to do with CJB and Riverside. I'm still convinced that Z took credit for CJB's murder but never actually committed it. I'm still uncertain as to whether or not Z killed anyone beyond the known Z victims. From my view, the jury is still deliberating on that issue.


By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (11.philadelphia05rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Sunday, April 28, 2002 - 08:10 am:

I'd have to see some evidence.

By Jake (Jake) (spider-mtc-tc013.proxy.aol.com - on Sunday, April 28, 2002 - 01:57 pm:

It's interesting that a lot of the major suspects have additional non-Z murders ascribed to them. Kaczynski and Davis aside, Kane has Donna Lass and O'Hare has Joan Webster. For my money, neither was the Zodiac, but each are good enough candidates for those murders according to their respective theorists. If, in fact, they were responsible for those murders but not the Z murders, might that not be a reason for odd and suspicious behavior that might be misinterpreted?

Again, I'm just introducing this for discussion; I don't know enough about the SRHMs to form a strong opinion on Allen's culpability either way.


By Ray N (Ray_N) (user-38ldesa.dialup.mindspring.com - on Sunday, April 28, 2002 - 10:58 pm:

I think it's all one guy. This is why Det. Baker wants to see what happened at lake herman road. It is a pivotal bridge to BRS and if we knew what the dynamics of the interactions were there, we might be in a better position to explain how somebody went from a amaterish botch job on the beach to a perfect job on the beach at LB. Nothing explains the jump from there to PH however. That's why I wanted to watch that one. It's more bizarre than any of the others, IMO.

By Peter H (Peter_H) (pool-141-154-21-20.bos.east.verizon.net - on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 07:06 am:


"Nothing explains the jump from there to PH however."


By Tony (Mahalo) (hnllhi1-ar1-4-63-132-167.hnllhi1.dsl-verizon.net - on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 11:08 am:

I agree Peter. This guy did his homework & changed his M.O. constantly. Maybe a born criminal like some are born with musical, artistic, or mathmatical talents. Ever seen the classic movie, 'The Bad Seed' where the little girl's gene deffeciancy(or effeciancy...spell check) is that of a murderess. Fiction but highly plausable.

By Peter H (Peter_H) (pool-141-154-17-226.bos.east.verizon.net - on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 01:09 pm:

Actually, Tony, I meant something very different. What you offer IS an explanation for such a jump: random changes to MO and personation, genetic deficiency. I don't believe that of Z. LHR and BRS were virtually identical in the important elements, and PH was a relatively modest departure: Some elements very similar, some different. LB, however, is a radical departure from the other 3, despite some superficial common elements, every single one of which could have been staged. I take Ray's statement as literally and simply true: there is nothing that explains a jump from LB to PH. But we digress from the thread: SR.

Jake: I have had a suspicion about the SR murders for some time. I seem to recall that the victimology was remarakably consistent: same physical type. Do you have any information on this? I tend to think it would cut against either Z or Allen, but I haven't been able to find any info that would either confirm or eliminate the hypothesis.

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (spider-ntc-ta033.proxy.aol.com - on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 02:42 pm:

". . .there is nothing that explains a jump from LB to PH . . ."

Nothing? Personally, I disagree. But I won't go into it on this thread.


By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (87.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 04:01 pm:

I wouldn't say "nothing" either. I think the imputation of homosexuality may have had something to do with it.

By Ray N (Ray_N) (user-38ldefq.dialup.mindspring.com - on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 09:08 pm:


Well, sure, but we're talking about common elements of the crimes.

It's quite possible that what you suggest happened. I hate to blame the media, but it's possible they started theorizing about him being gay and calling him the 'ladykiller' ("telling lies about me"). Maybe he was all done at LB, but they p*ssed him off and he went and blew away Stine to show them they didn't know jack, so to speak. If true, this would support my theory that Z was not a complusive serial killer. He did this series because he felt like it. He was out to prove to himself that he was smart and the world was stupid and f'd up. He felt if he did these things and got away with them, he'd have proven his theory.

This might tend to explain PH, but there's no evidence of any of this. So I stand by the statement that no bridge exists. (Of course one exists, we just haven't identified it.)


By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (120.philadelphia04rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 02:59 am:

Ray, Zodiac might have been a "serial killer" inasmuch as he committed a series of killings, but he had none of the traits associated with what the term commonly applies, i.e., sexual sadist. He killed for the same reason a mass murderer kills, namely, frustration and a sense of impotence.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (180.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 03:58 am:

I meant "implies" not "applies."

By Tony (Mahalo) (hnllhi1-ar1-4-63-133-171.hnllhi1.dsl-verizon.net - on Friday, May 03, 2002 - 03:10 am:

Sexual sadist, serial killer,... bla,bla bla...he was simply about power & "controol" over everything unassuming around him.(IMO)

By Tony (Mahalo) (hnllhi1-ar1-4-63-133-171.hnllhi1.dsl-verizon.net - on Friday, May 03, 2002 - 03:13 am:

BTW..Is bla norweigen for sheep..or is it blah..?