Kacyznski Officially Cleared?
Zodiackiller.com Message Board: Other Suspects: Kacyznski Officially Cleared?
|By Linda (Linda) (207-172-73-23.s23.tnt1.fdk.md.dialup.rcn.com - 220.127.116.11) on Saturday, April 21, 2001 - 09:09 pm:|
That info [Ted K (as according to the FBI crime files) was indeed investigated for the Zodiac crimes and
officially cleared of them] is presented on several sites, among them The Crime Files, and of course on Tom
Voigt's Other Suspects."
Thanks for the update Sylvie. I guess I didn't "read up" carefully enough and must have missed the message that TK was "officially cleared" in the "Other Suspects" thread... However, being the skeptic that I am, I like actual proof. I want to see in black and white or hear from the FBI themselves exactly what drew them to the conclusion that Ted was "officially cleared" of the Zodiac crimes. What made the FBI unequivocally adamant that Ted was not the Zodiac? They must have "documentation" and "proof" of his specific andundeniable whereabouts on (at the very least) one of the "known" Zodiac crimes. To my knowledge, there is nothing that is "officially" in print (which means including verification and proof) by the FBI in this regard. Hearsay from a web-site, book, etc. (or even from a task force meeting where someone said the FBI had "officially cleared" a suspect) is not "proof." If there were any "provable" alibis for Ted, I dare say the FBI,
police, investigating agencies, attorneys for Ted (or even Ted himself) would not hesitate to bring their confirmation forth with specifics, details and "proof" . If for no other reason than to quickly dispel the idea of Ted being the strong and "viable" suspect that he is in so many numerous ways.
|By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (93.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 18.104.22.168) on Saturday, April 21, 2001 - 09:34 pm:|
Linda, this eerie silience must be a conspiracy by the FBI, the CIA, the SFPD and the
KKK to prevent the true story from coming out.
If such facile proof of Ted's innocence actually did exist, you can bet your boots that I would have heard from him by now. As it is, three months have passed, and nothing has transpired.
|By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-wg012.proxy.aol.com - 22.214.171.124) on Saturday, April 21, 2001 - 09:39 pm:|
respectfully, did you ever think that TedK's lack of response is less of an implication of guilt than it is not wanting to dignify a response?
|By Roger Redding (Roger_Redding) (user-33qs1i1.dialup.mindspring.com - 126.96.36.199) on Saturday, April 21, 2001 - 09:43 pm:|
Perhaps more to the point, how many correspondences has Ted K responded to from anybody (excepting perhaps his lawyers, potential publishers, and well-known journalists) lately?
|By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (181.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 188.8.131.52) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 05:07 am:|
Ted writes hundreds of letters--letters are his life. People who have corresponded with me have had replies to their communications with him. And Sylvie, you may be correct, but if his past is any indication, it's an imputation he'd kill to correct.
|By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-tr032.proxy.aol.com - 184.108.40.206) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 10:45 am:|
Why don't you try the brother?? As you've said he knew him best. He turned him in once as the Unabomber, maybe he'll turn him in this time as the Zodiac.
|By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (103.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 220.127.116.11) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 02:10 pm:|
The brother (his name is David Kaczynski) isn't going to give me any information. He
gave up information on Ted only after nagging by his wife, and only after assurances by
the FBI that his role in ratting out Ted would remain a secret. There's very good evidence
to believe that he assisted Ted, at least in the early crimes.
However, my correspondent (and early antagonist) Getman contacted David's attorney to find out whether the numerous correspondences from Ted to Dave offered any alibi evidence for the Zodiac activities. According to the attorney (Busceglie) there were none. According to Getman, Busceglie took the request quite seriously.
|By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-mtc-th031.proxy.aol.com - 18.104.22.168) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 04:01 pm:|
The logic then would be if the wife harped on about unabomber, why would'nt she nag on
turning over evidence on Zodiac.(Just to clear the case.)
The answer may be that perhaps the nagging wife really just wanted the reward money. Which leads me to the question: Is there bounty on Z?
|By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (113.philadelphia08rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 22.214.171.124) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 05:22 pm:|
Sylvie, if you're going to try to discourse on the Unabomber, you really ought to learn something about the case and the people involved in it. Believe me, there's plenty of information out there. Or one could simply take his cue from the mainstream media, who can't seem to get over life without television or toilets.
|By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-0720.stbg.splitrock.net - 126.96.36.199) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 06:39 pm:|
One of the problems here is that people find it very hard to believe one person could be responsible for 2 prolific cases like this. Sylvie let me ask your opinion . Look at the Zodiac composite and the late 60's shot of Kaczynski, both are on the site under suspects Ted Kaczynski. Do you think they both have an owlish look ??
|By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (acb411e7.ipt.aol.com - 188.8.131.52) on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 12:43 am:|
Sylvie, you should include an e-mail address in your posts so you can be contacted.