Why Kaczynski can't be Zodiac ?


Zodiackiller.com Message Board: Other Suspects: Why Kaczynski can't be Zodiac ?

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-0719.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.42.211) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 10:01 am:

I've been reading lately how insane it is to believe Kaczinski could possibly be Zodiac. They say why not Ted Bundy ? Ted Bundy was not known as a bomb making, letter writing, terrorist like killer of both sexes. Ted B also is alibied many times due to school attendance records. So throwing out Bundy's name is very weak. I know the Bundy case inside and out. Ted Bundy can't be Zodiac. He may have commited some murders in Calif. area, maybe SF even.
The only thing i see that could possibly disqualify Ted K is strong alibi evidence which I'm not sure exists. But I want the people labeling Ted K as impossible and insane to use this topic to tell me why and then I ( and maybe others) will respond.
I look forward to your argumentss. In the meantime look at this i've gathered from the board: Zodiacs letters: This is "Theodekaczinsiapg" Possible decoding to 13 symbol code: "Theodorekaczinsiaaaoommen" And letters in first line of 340 symbols code= "THEODORQVPKiLG last line= "KAZINSKiMDHQO"
* capital I is symbol that closely resembles I.
Thank you, even if this topic remains a blank after this I gave it a shot. ZK

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-mtc-th043.proxy.aol.com - 64.12.102.38) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 11:28 am:

Zk: Sheer instinct, amongst other things. Just a few points as I'm in a rush.
1) style: TK's writings have an introspective, soul searching style, yes, even when he mentions killing the people he hates and he can be extremely loquacious as opposed to the aggressive in your face more terse Zodiac letters.
2)have you ever read of Ted wanting to harm children?
3)pretty much everyone agrees that Zodiac must have had some kind of Riverside connection(more than just a day-drive) even if he didn't actually kill CJB. Even Doug admits to having a problem with this one.
4)If you take Kathleen as an actual victim which Doug's site does--then doesn't it seem a little weird that he can't form any sort of relationship with a woman, he can't get laid in the free sex life style of the East Bay where he was situated, can't even muster up the nerve to go to a prostitute but he can drive around in a car with a woman for a couple of hours.
5) we never hear of Z going on about Technology and what it is doing to the Earth, etc.
What did Zodiac suddenly become a born again environmentalist?
Plus plenty more..........

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-mtc-th043.proxy.aol.com - 64.12.102.38) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 11:57 am:

One last note--as much as I am impressed by the work that has gone into Doug's site, I have to say at times he is really pushing it. For example--he coorelates Tk's style to Z's because they both start sentences with the word "SO"--okay that is half the population. Then they both use the word "fun", I say this word at least 30 X's per day, then what was another one, oh yes--"being",
etc.,etc.
So,I am having fun being with you folks.

By Zoe Glass (Zoe_Glass) (max1-4.evansinet.com - 208.202.125.35) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 03:26 pm:

we may have never really understood how z was going on about technology.which brings to mind some questions.
does anyone else think K's manifesto is riddled with code?
could k be involved with z ? (mutual influences)

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-tr023.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.201.183) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 05:11 pm:

Now that would be fuuny if all of Z's codes were cracked and it turned out to be a manifesto against technology exhortations against scientific research. But Come On...

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (113.philadelphia08rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.31.113) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 06:07 pm:

Sylvie, allow me to go over your questions one by one:

1) style: TK's writings have an introspective, soul searching style, yes, even when he mentions killing the people he hates and he can be extremely loquacious as opposed to the aggressive in your face more terse Zodiac letters.

Not to get too personal or anything, but do you really believe that Zodiac never composed any writing other than his letters to the Bay area press? Do you think he never lived a life outside of the few hours he spent as the Zodiac killer? That's a rather shallow way of looking at things, from my perspective. When you refer to Kaczynski's writings as being introspective and soul-searching it's obvious you aren't familiar with anything he's written other than the Manifesto, which was couched in scholarly prose for the purpose of presenting a position. You're obviously not familiar with the writings to his family in which he states that he wants his parents to die, so that he can spit on their graves, or the angry letter to a former employer ("Dear, Sweet Fat Joe,") his reference to a girl he knew as a "pig," or the terribly cruel missive to one of his bombing victims, David Gelernter ("People with advanced degrees aren't as smart as they think they are. If you'd had any brains ..."). In fact, you betray your ignorance of the Zodiac case when you refer to his letters as "in your face." With the possible exception of part of the 7-page letter, the complete opposite is true. The Zodiac letters are blunt and to-the-point, free of rambling and unnecessary verbiage. To top it off, they're excessively polite in tone, and virtually free of profanity.

2)have you ever read of Ted wanting to harm children?

Actions speak louder than words. Kaczynski's third device was a barometer-triggered bomb designed to detonate on a passenger flight from Chicago to Washington, D.C. The device intended for Thomas Mosser was mailed directly to his home. His wife and young children had just left the kitchen when he opened the package, blowing himself to shreds. Had they remained in the kitchen, they, too, would have become Kaczynski's victims. A pregnant secretary escaped with her life when she found herself unable to open the bomb parcel intended for her boss. Kaczynski has shown no regret for having committed these, or any other, of his murderous acts. One can only assume that murdering innocent children is not a problem for him.

On the other hand, those interested in analyzing the Zodiac case need to be quite careful about the inferences they make. Zodiac's school bus threat was just that--a threat that was probably designed to terrorize the people of the Bay area and earn Zodiac a little free publicity. Which, incidentally, is exactly what Ted did in 1995, before sending his retraction notice to--of all places--the San Francisco Chronicle.

3)pretty much everyone agrees that Zodiac must have had some kind of Riverside connection(more than just a day-drive) even if he didn't actually kill CJB. Even Doug admits to having a problem with this one.

I don't agree that Zodiac "must" have had some kind of Riverside connection, only that a great deal of the evidence seems to support it. Kaczynski hasn't given us an alibi for Riverside, and we know that even though he lived on the campus of the University of Michigan at the time, he traveled to California at least once (and probably twice) in the period from September, 1966 through June, 1967. It's always suspicious if "your" suspect lives full-time in proximity to the areas where the crimes have been committed, but doubly suspicious when he lives thousands of miles away and just happens to have traveled to the area in time for the events.

4)If you take Kathleen as an actual victim which Doug's site does--then doesn't it seem a little weird that he can't form any sort of relationship with a woman, he can't get laid in the free sex life style of the East Bay where he was situated, can't even muster up the nerve to go to a prostitute but he can drive around in a car with a woman for a couple of hours.

Which is exactly the kind of thing you'd expect from someone who wanted a woman but didn't know how to deal with one. He didn't touch her. He barely spoke to her. He appeared to get off on just having her in the car.

By the way, Sylvie, you need to understand that there are many people out there who perceive sex as something other than intercourse. :-)

5) we never hear of Z going on about Technology and what it is doing to the Earth, etc.
What did Zodiac suddenly become a born again environmentalist?


Once again we hearken back to the notion that, whoever he might be, Zodiac has a life completely removed from his identity as a killer.

In the first place, Kaczynski does not describe himself as an environmentalist. He is an anarchist, dedicated to the destruction of the technological system, and with it, the destruction of the human race.

His anti-technology views were formed at some point between 1970 and 1971, after reading the works of Jacques Ellul. Prior to that he was a very angry, socially and sexually frustrated individual, full of blind rage, and vindictive to the point of murder.

And by the way, so far as the stylistic comparisons are concerned, I think it quite germane that a Harvard-educated genius, a PhD, a published writer and a Berkeley professor who normally took great care with his style and usage should begin a sentence with the word "So," or use the word "being" in the sense that both these killers used it. It wouldn't be quite so suspicious coming from, say, a middle-aged divorcee attending criminal justice classes at the local community college, but for Kaczynski it's unusual enough to be remarked upon.

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-0720.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.42.212) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 07:22 pm:

Sylvie, you mention sheer instinct. I agree people are instinctively skeptical that Ted could be Zodiac, and it is mind-boggling indeed for one to be so legendary. I too was doubtful at first. But now I look at it as a very real possibility. Look at the cases without bias and you will see a lot of coincidences that need explaining.

By Mark (Mark) (247-119-237-24.anc-dial.gci.net - 24.237.119.247) on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 09:33 pm:

JK-my reference to Ted Bundy was meant as a joke,
didn't mean to have it taken seriously. Maybe you're right about being more openminded about the Kacynski possibility but I have a problem with him driving out to Riverside from Michigan to kill a coed. Did he have any friends or relatives in that area or a reason to be there? It's beginning to look like Zodiac quite possibly didn't have anything to do with the Bates murder,
lets hope the DNA test results come in this year!

By Linda (Linda) (207-172-73-23.s23.tnt1.fdk.md.dialup.rcn.com - 207.172.73.23) on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 12:52 am:

Riverside is one that is not a "confirmed" Zodiac case, although, it has strong enough ties that it certainly appears to be one. I would not want to (for any of the suspects) use the Riverside Crime as one to connect to Z until we positively identify Z with his other "confirmed" and "known" crimes; however:

"If" the Riverside slaying did turn out to be that of Z and in further considering TK as the infamous Z, as Douglas and Mike have indicated in their research, in the Autum of 1966, Ted was in the process of making application for employment and visiting locations in California. Too, note, this is the time in Ted's life when he was becoming extremely sexually frustrated, contemplated (in 1966 - even though briefly and with much embarrassment to himself) a sex change, and (in identifying events of 1966 - in his own writings) described how he "...really felt he could kill someone..." or "...do things that were daring, 'irresponsible' or criminal..."

By Linda (Linda) (207-172-73-23.s23.tnt1.fdk.md.dialup.rcn.com - 207.172.73.23) on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 01:26 am:

Sylvie:

"Sheer Instinct" does not solve crimes. A good sleuth, detective or investigator might use his "sheer instinct" to lead him down a particular path in search of evidence or to a suspect, but then a good sleuth, detective or investigator looks for and uses "proof" to connect his theories to the crime... The "proof" is in the pudding...

Doug and Mike have "proven" that TK is an extremely LOGICAL SUSPECT for NUMEROUS and very REALISTIC reasons; the only remaining piece to the puzzle in making TK the most "undeniable" suspect is "proof" of TK's whereabouts to either "prove" that he specifically "was" in the area at that time or prove that he positively "wasn't" in the area; which, of course, would lead to dismissal of TK as a suspect... If that's the case, then definitely, it would be time to DROP TK... Until then...

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (proxy-dover.mednet.af.mil - 199.251.67.253) on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 06:33 am:

Mark, I too would have a problem with Kaczynski going out to Riverside simply to kill a coed. But I've got no problem at all believing that he went to Riverside as part of his quest for a place to find employment once his doctoral dissertation was completed. In fact, that's exactly what he was doing at the time. He found a position at UC Berkeley (the biography that accompanied his application is hand-dated December 22, 1966) but is it too incredible to think that he might have checked out other campuses within the UC system, such as LA, Santa Barbara, or Riverside?

Kaczynski was very comfortable in the college setting, and in fact, his parents used to spend their vacation time traveling from one college to the next, living in student hostels rather than motels.

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-0702.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.42.194) on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 07:29 am:

It seems as if the 3 short Riverside letters are most likely the work of Zodiac due to the extra postage, slanted writing, cursive d, sharp r, and they were sent on a 6 month anniversary. The confession letter did seek publicity, mentioned a phone call, misspelling of "minuts", and has a Jack the Ripper theme similar to Z letters. Also sending an obscure carbon copy shows the writer was interested in not being caught.
Perhaps a rambling Kaczynski did murder Miss Bates and sent all the letters and even wrote the poem. One possible connection between Zodiac, Kazcinski, and Riverside is Teds writing style. Ted tends to raise his double L's above the vowel before it. You see this in Z letters and on the words "spilling" and "till" on the desktop poem. Additionally Ted enjoys libraries. Of course none of this is rock solid.
But one thing I would draw from this regardless of who you believe Zodiac to be. If Zodiac sent the 3 short letters which it looks very likely that he did. The handwriting is obviously altered. Zodiac has shown he can write very neatly. This tells me he didn't want to use his real handwriting, so you're not gonna find his real handwriting on the Zodiac letters, just something reasonably close ???

By Linda (Linda) (207-172-73-252.s252.tnt1.fdk.md.dialup.rcn.com - 207.172.73.252) on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 02:41 pm:

Doug...

ZK noted above that the Riverside, typed confession letter was an obscure carbon copy indicating that the writer was trying to be careful and not interested in having a clear and possibly traceable copy available to the authorities. I know Ted used a typewriter for the drafting of his letters. Do you know if Ted, also, sent obscure carbon copies to aid in the disguise of the print? (In the back of my mind I thought I had read this somewhere, but can't remember where... if at all).

Thanks for the response! Linda!

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (142.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.142) on Tuesday, April 24, 2001 - 04:26 pm:

Eeek, Linda, I was going to reply to your query by stating that Kaczynski had never submitted carbon copies, but in at least one instance he did. Reference the Tom Tyler letter of June 30, 1995, in which he says, "We apologize for sending you such a poor carbon copy of our manuscript ..." Whether other carbon copies were sent I can't say, although carbon paper was discovered in his shack.

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-ta021.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.16.26) on Tuesday, April 24, 2001 - 04:33 pm:

There was still carbon paper around in 1995? I didn't know anyone still used it...

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (122.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.122) on Tuesday, April 24, 2001 - 05:35 pm:

See this url: http://www.keysan.com/~keysan/ksu0739.htm

Ted was "old school," meaning he prepared all his correspondences on one of three portable manual typewriters.

By Mark (Mark) (107-121-237-24.anc-dial.gci.net - 24.237.121.107) on Tuesday, April 24, 2001 - 11:38 pm:

Doug-I wasn't aware of his applying for teaching positions during this time, sounds very plausible he could've been in the area then.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (62.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.62) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 04:17 am:

Mark, not only that, the fact is that he had to have been in CA at least once from about September, 1966 through around June, 1967. The "faculty bio" that accompanied his application was hand-dated December 22, 1966, and he actually relocated to the Bay Area in June, 1967, having between offered, and accepted, the job at Berkeley. Now, the application might have been mailed, but at some point he would have had to travel to the campus. There's no way they would have hired him sight unseen.

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-mtc-th054.proxy.aol.com - 64.12.102.44) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 10:19 am:

Doug,
I'm not going to post on Tom's site anymore because he is just too insecure.
Anyway, a Math prof phd at the university where I do translations tells me that TedK as a Harvard alumni would never have "lowered himself to a UCR, it was nothing in comparison to a Berkeley in terms of research, etc.and TedK would have been overqualified, Ted would have known this he was not stupid."
Riverside has a come a long way,but back then it was really the Styx.

Sylvie

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (proxy-dover.mednet.af.mil - 199.251.67.253) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 01:04 pm:

Once again, Sylvie, your imperfect knowledge of the Unabomber case is leading you to conclusions that are far from precise. According to Stephen Lapham, the prosecutor in Unabom trial, who had access to the documents, Kaczynski's only reason for taking a teaching position was to save money to put toward his move to the wilderness, not to advance a career in mathematics. A year after taking the position at Berkeley he was already talking to associates about leaving.

If you're truly interested in researching crimes such as these you've got to avoid falling into the trap of basing profound conclusions on offhand observations. Given the dearth of information about Kaczynski's mindset, to conclude that someone wouldn't have lowered himself to do one thing or another, based upon a single, weak criterion, is fairly naive, in my opinion.

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (spider-tl083.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.207.213) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 01:12 pm:

Doug, you're just being insecure.

By Jake (Jake) (spider-tm021.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.197.51) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 01:55 pm:

Doug wrote:
"to conclude that someone wouldn't have lowered himself to do one thing or another, based upon a single, weak criterion, is fairly naive, in my opinion."

How about concluding that someone was a serial killer, based on a dozen weak criteria?

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

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-0703.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.42.195) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 02:07 pm:

Slyvie should continue to post because I had no idea that Kazinski was planning his retreat so early on and now I know. These exchanges are very valuable. Sylvie, do you have a favorite suspect ? Is it Kane ?

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (101.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.101) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 02:21 pm:

You're right, Jake, the Unabomber wasn't a killer, nor did he kill serially. What a boneheaded conclusion, based on all those "weak" criteria. Sorry about that.

By Jake (Jake) (spider-tm021.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.197.51) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 03:27 pm:

Doug wrote:
"You're right, Jake, the Unabomber wasn't a killer, nor did he kill serially."

Sure he did -- just not on December 20, 1968; July 5, 1969; September 27, 1969; or October 11, 1969.

A carpet is neither a car, nor a pet, Doug, though you could put a page up on your site saying that it was both. Your sarcasm is duly noted as the safe alternative to a defense of your criteria.

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

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-1247.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.37.231) on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 - 07:51 pm:

Jake wrote "sure he did, just not on Desember 20, 1968,ETC.." Jake, since this topic is "Why CAN'T Kazynski be Zodiac" perhaps you should bet busy hitting those keys with details. A proven bomb-making letter writing terrorist killer of both sexes who wanted to kill in 1966, drove a tan car, and resembles the composite is a good starting point. There is much more. Even if Ted turns out not to be Zodiac the idea that he is a laughable suspect is laughable.

By Jake (Jake) (spider-tm064.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.197.74) on Thursday, April 26, 2001 - 02:38 pm:

If I applied the same logic to the night sky that you guys do to your suspects, I could lay out an incontrovertible case that God exists, and that He intentionally designed the universe to resemble figures from Greek mythology. After all, we have not one but dozens of such figures up there: Orion, Cassiopeia, Pegasus, etc. Not only do we have so many examples, but in thousands of years, no one has proposed a better suspect -- um, I mean a better explanation for why the stars fit these patterns.

I've seen what you've got, and I'm still not convinced. I can think of three theorists, each with a different suspect, who use the same evidence as you and Doug to make their case. The only thing that Kaczynski has over any of them is that he was convicted of murder -- by a means so radically different from the Zodiac's that it counts as exculpatory evidence. If you insist on seeing confirmation in the absence of refutation, then this admittedly intriguing study in coincidence will go on forever.

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

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (175.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.175) on Thursday, April 26, 2001 - 02:55 pm:

In addition to what the other theorists offer, I can offer motive and intent, based on documentary evidence and the facts of Zodiac's victimology. Those elements, coupled with all the "window dressing," I've presented on my web page serve to make Kaczynski a suspect to be reckoned with, until such time as a clear alibi can be established for him.

And when you talk about "means," don't forget that only good luck saved the life of the miner that Kaczynski shot with his 30-30 rifle in the 80s. Had that miner died, Kaczynski would have been charged with yet another murder following his arrest; only the statute of limitations on attempted murder prevented this. And we have no idea how many people Kaczynski might have killed outside his role as the Unabomber.

Further, I've never required anyone to accept Kaczynski as the Zodiac killer. I've simply asked, as have others, that he be considered as a suspect.

Michael Butterfield was quite right in suggesting that within the Zodiac circles a double standard exists for Kaczynski. I think I know the reason why, and it has to do with egos and insecurities.

By Jake (Jake) (spider-tm064.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.197.74) on Thursday, April 26, 2001 - 03:35 pm:

Doug wrote:
"Michael Butterfield was quite right in suggesting that within the Zodiac circles a double standard exists for Kaczynski. I think I know the reason why, and it has to do with egos and insecurities."

I'll presume, since I've lately drawn your ire, that this innuendo was direcTed at me, and I'll shrug it off along with your sarcasm. I have the good sense to know when I'm wrong, and rather than propose increasingly tenuous theories to explain away contradictory evidence, I've owned up to it every time.

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

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-1225.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.37.209) on Thursday, April 26, 2001 - 06:50 pm:

Jake, sending a bomb threat thru the mail and sending a bomb thru the mail aren't that radically different. The order of events suggests the evolution of a killer who was almost captured and needs a safer way to satisfy his desire to kill and raise hell. Zodiac seemed really interested in bombs, right? Terror thru the mail ? Profiling and magical thinking don't solve cases. In fact Kazinski was profiled out of Unabomber contention. Who are these 3 other Bay area terrorist bomb making, letter writing ,tan car driving, radian using, composite resembling, job quitting right before july 4th, cursive d writing, motorcycle noise disturbed, unmolesting killer of both sexes. You talk of coincidence. 3 just like this ??

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (45.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.45) on Thursday, April 26, 2001 - 07:16 pm:

Right, ZK, and don't forget that Kaczynski wasn't only a bomb mailer, he was a maker of bomb threats as well, including the big one of 1995 in which he virtually duplicated Zodiac's terror campaign by threatening to blow up the plane of a major airline and then retracting the threat a couple of days letter in a terse note to ... The San Francisco Chronicle. Like our friend Zodiac, he had discovered that all he needed was a little credibility in order to get the publicity he wanted without going to the trouble of actually killing anyone. That's some hell of a weak suspect we've got here.

By Linda (Linda) (207-172-74-244.s244.tnt2.fdk.md.dialup.rcn.com - 207.172.74.244) on Thursday, April 26, 2001 - 07:38 pm:

Woops... You two forgot one "minor" thing... They both wrote in "code!"

Linda!

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (208.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.208) on Thursday, April 26, 2001 - 08:42 pm:

Aw, everybody designs his own code.

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-tj052.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.213.197) on Friday, April 27, 2001 - 11:16 am:

ZK,
since you requested my opinion on the identity of Zodiac, I will say that yes I lean toward Kane. Or if he is not Z, then I believe he was at least the abductor of Kathleen. Most of the posters on this board are men and hence think like men, but I can tell you that as a woman and mother, if an abductor held me captive in his car with him for a few hours, with the heightened sense of awareness that comes with knowing that the life of my small child and unborn baby was at stake, then I would have this man's face and voice etched in my brain, disguise or not. She chose Kane out of a group of 18 and apparently told Tom that she has only ever identified Kane as the one.
Plenty of other things fit as well. By the way, Sandy that was an excellent observation that Happy Chrissmas could have been related to Happy Hanukah.
Doug, I will take this chance to go over some points. You chastize those who have an "imperfect knowledge of TK", frankly I think the only one with a PERFECT knowledge of TK is TedK. You may be aware of what TK ate for breakfast, etc., but it doesn't seem like you understand points relative to the case perfectly well. I, for one know Riverside very well. You really prove my point when you say that TK was really just looking for a quick buck before he retreated, well not only was UCR low on prestige in 1966 but it was low in salary. Had he just been into money he'd have tried USC. Furthermore, Rcc is not right next to UCR, it is in another part of the city, and it is (was) either a kind of extension of h.s. or a c.c. where folks who already have their degrees take classes for fun. Ted was'nt really into fun and he could have written the Math texts in that library when he was 14. There were plenty of coeds at UCR, what would he have been doing meandering across town to a c.c.???
Another point you have is simply wrong--you state that as a Harvard ed. phd., TK would never have used words like "blast, being, fun" or starting a sentence with So..---so untrue. I have plenty of aquaintances with Harvard, Yale degrees and they all use this venacular. My best friend is Summma cum laude, first in her class Harvard Law, and she talks like a Valley girl. We both agree how you speak is very regional, Clinton somtimes sounds like a hillbilly, don't you think?
Plus, you prove another point KJ would have definitly noticed a form of speech well above hers--coming from a modest San Bernadino situation.
Finally, you speak of codes. Well, Doug alot of people are into cryptology as a hobby. My 11 yr. old son has devised his own codes and they are much more impressive than Z's. (Although he is a Tk-like genious minus the violence).
I concur with a federal agent family friend -- Tedk as a Z suspect is simply not credible,(have you ever found anyone in law enforcement who is with you??) I kind of half-way hope you are right though--it would be a hilarious twist.

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (ac916c7d.ipt.aol.com - 172.145.108.125) on Friday, April 27, 2001 - 11:36 am:

It is likely that Johns picked Kane's picture from a lineup that featured only pictures of Kane, as that is the favored technique of Harvey Hines.

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-wg074.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.196.54) on Friday, April 27, 2001 - 02:16 pm:

She still could have said --"it is NONE of them, as she apparently did with all the photos Toschi sent her (Graysmith--p.140).

By Jake (Jake) (spider-te081.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.195.211) on Friday, April 27, 2001 - 02:55 pm:

ZK wrote:
"Jake, sending a bomb threat thru the mail and sending a bomb thru the mail aren't that radically different. The order of events suggests the evolution of a killer who was almost captured and needs a safer way to satisfy his desire to kill and raise hell."

The difference right off the bat is that Kaczynski knew how to build a bomb, and the Zodiac was designing one without any practical knowledge. Have you looked at the diagrams? They were accurately described as "Rube Goldberg devices," with unnecessarily complicated timers and contacts. They would never have worked in real life. Kaczynski had the mechanical ability to design and create a working bomb at a young age, long before Z sent his threats. Where, then, does evolution fit in? Ted would have to have devolved to design those plans. You guys don't seem to acknowledge the impact that Z had on everyone living in the Bay Area at the time -- including Ted, who would certainly have remembered the Zodiac's letter writing campaign, and incorporated those tactics as the Unabomber. What, do you think everybody had forgotten about him by 1995? Has it ever crossed your mind that Ted was simply inspired by the Zodiac?!

"Zodiac seemed really interested in bombs, right?"

Wrong. The bomb threats only came after the murders. You could just as easily say "Zodiac seemed really interested in buses, right?"

"Terror thru the mail ?"

Right! The bomb threats were another way of inspiring awe and terror in the populace, once he had decided against or been scared out of killing.

"Who are these 3 other Bay area terrorist bomb making, letter writing ,tan car driving, radian using, composite resembling, job quitting right before july 4th, cursive d writing, motorcycle noise disturbed, unmolesting killer of both sexes. You talk of coincidence. 3 just like this ??"

You bet. Mike O'Hare's writing is just as good -- if not better -- than Ted's; he knew what a radian was; he wrote bizarre letters to the editor of the Chronicle; looks like the composite; and he was travelling to the Bay Area at just the right times. His social security number matches the meridian of longitude that passes through Riverside. You might have me on the car, since I don't know what he was driving, but I've got you on encoded messages. Allen wrote to the cops; had a friend with a car that was not just tan, but the right model as well; he could look like Z with a wig; his writing is good enough for some; and he was suspected in the Santa Rosa hitchhiker murders. He had the added benefit of being intimately familiar with Vallejo and environs -- what's your theory on Ted K in a lovers' lane in the middle of nowhere? The SF businessman is a dead ringer for the composite; knew the appropriate northern and southern California areas; had access to all the right cars; had a proper British upbringing; wrote odd letters to the Chronicle; and has many other links that I'm not at liberty to discuss. Like I said: God must have created the Heavens to resemble figures from Greek mythology, since there are so many of them up there. I mean, it can't be coincidence, right? Or people imposing patterns on chaos?

Profiling may not solve crimes, but neither does a laundry list of vague similarities held by literally thousands of white males living or travelling to the Bay Area.

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

By Linda (Linda) (207-172-74-32.s32.tnt2.fdk.md.dialup.rcn.com - 207.172.74.32) on Friday, April 27, 2001 - 07:54 pm:

Jake...

See New Thread under Other Suspects, "The Writings of Michael O'Hare."

Thanks.

Linda

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-1236.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.37.220) on Friday, April 27, 2001 - 08:57 pm:

Jake, I'm no bomb expert so I can only say Ted and Zodiac both used bomb threats. This imitation deal does not make any sense. Most of the UnaZodiac connection can't even be argued as imitation such as bomb interest, radians and the zodiac symbol, tan car , composite, handwriting and spacing etc. , as well as Teds anger at society, bitterness over lack of female companionship, and desire to kill etc.. In fact you'd have a much stronger argument claiming Zodiac imitated Kaczinski. This would explain his choice of names as he pulled "the zodiac" right out of Ted's name.
As far as the 3 suspects listed, let me preface by saying that though it is well-written, it didn't knock me off my chair. I wouldn't go krazy over any Santa Rosa connections. I don't know much about Michael O, but it seems most people consider his viability lightly. As far as Allen goes, he has viability, but he is the opposite style suspect of Kazcynski. He is Z if Z was lucky and half-mooned his way thru avoiding detection. Since you can't comment on the 3rd suspect, I won't either.
You seem to suggest 3 things in your writing that i find to be very bizzare. 1. Zodiac was not interested in bombs. 2. Since 3 people were killed in Vallejo, this makes Kazynski less viable. 3. There were 1000's of hostile, bomb threating, terrorist-like serial killers in the Bay area in 1969.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (136.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.136) on Friday, April 27, 2001 - 09:28 pm:

The difference right off the bat is that Kaczynski knew how to build a bomb, and the Zodiac was designing one without any practical knowledge. Have you looked at the diagrams? They were accurately described as "Rube Goldberg devices," with unnecessarily complicated timers and contacts. They would never have worked in real life. Kaczynski had the mechanical ability to design and create a working bomb at a young age, long before Z sent his threats. Where, then, does evolution fit in?

Jake, Kaczynski didn't design a lethal bomb until 1985. He began his bombing spree as the Unabomber in 1978, using bomb designs that were so feeble as to have been little more than practical jokes. The 1978 and 1979 bombs were crudely comprised of match heads and smokeless powder taken from shotgun shells which couldn't produce an explosion of any force. His 1979 airline bomb consisted of smokeless powder in a juice can that ignited without an explosion and did no physical damage other than burning a couple of mail sacks in the cargo hold. In his journals he expressed frustration at his inability to build a lethal bomb. There is no evidence that Kaczynski possessed any kind of advanced bomb-making skills up to ca. 1985, by which time he had done some experimentation with pipe bombs and detonators. His youthful efforts at bomb-making consisted of detonating sacks of fertilizer in metal trash cans, which, incidentally, is just the kind of cumbersome, unworkable device proposed by Zodiac.

Of course, you know this Jake. I know you know it, and you know that I know you know it.

As for the other contention:

Mike O'Hare's writing is just as good -- if not better -- than Ted's; he knew what a radian was; he wrote bizarre letters to the editor of the Chronicle; looks like the composite; and he was travelling to the Bay Area at just the right times. His social security number matches the meridian of longitude that passes through Riverside. You might have me on the car, since I don't know what he was driving, but I've got you on encoded messages. Allen wrote to the cops; had a friend with a car that was not just tan, but the right model as well; he could look like Z with a wig; his writing is good enough for some; and he was suspected in the Santa Rosa hitchhiker murders. He had the added benefit of being intimately familiar with Vallejo and environs -- what's your theory on Ted K in a lovers' lane in the middle of nowhere? The SF businessman is a dead ringer for the composite; knew the appropriate northern and southern California areas; had access to all the right cars; had a proper British upbringing; wrote odd letters to the Chronicle; and has many other links that I'm not at liberty to discuss.

I try to avoid commenting on the suspects of other theorists because my area of concentration is Kaczynski, and I'm not one to believe that because others' suspects fail mine will pass by default. But with Kaczynski there is something missing in the others: motive and intent. If a suspect's only link to Zodiac was a tan car, or certain turns of phrases, or a similarity to the composite, or being in the Bay Area, it's a pretty feeble point upon which to base a comparison. But if the suspect is an asexual, has expressed the desire to kill based on sexual frustration, then at some point shows himself capable of killing for motivations of revenge and national publicity, writes letters and graffiti consequent to murder for the purpose of attaining that publicity and uses the credibility fostered by the murders to place threats that paralyze large areas of the west coast, then the fact of his driving a tan car, or resembling the composite, or writing in code become something far more than mere quibbling points. Kaczynski outranks these other suspects because he possessed the appropriate psychological profile one would expect of Zodiac, from which motive and intent can be easily rationalized.

But once again, you know that. I know you know it, and you know that I know you know it.

As for your question about Kaczynski's being in a lover's lane in the "middle of nowhere," Kaczynski lived for two years not twenty minutes from that lover's lane in Berkeley. While there he spent time hunting large game as far away as Humboldt County, and since he disliked urban areas there's no reason to suppose he didn't spend time in the rather uninhabited countryside around Vallejo or Mt. Diablo, or any other such areas (he certainly got to Yosemite, where he was seen by a fellow professor in 1968). In fact, driving about those areas and having the solitude spoiled by young couples "doing their thing" in parked cars would have been just the impetus for vindictive Kaczynski to have fermented himself into a murderous rage.

But of course, Jake, you know this. I know you know it, and you know that I know you know it.

By Jake (Jake) (spider-we032.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.195.32) on Saturday, April 28, 2001 - 10:22 am:

ZK wrote:
"You seem to suggest 3 things in your writing that i find to be very bizzare. 1. Zodiac was not interested in bombs. 2. Since 3 people were killed in Vallejo, this makes Kazynski less viable. 3. There were 1000's of hostile, bomb threating, terrorist-like serial killers in the Bay area in 1969."

1. The Zodiac was interested in inspiring terror and awe. He submitted the bus bomb diagrams after he had been spotted by police, which must have been akin to a terrifying coitus interruptus to a killer basking in his perceived glory. Now, this event may have led Z to stop killing, but it did not eliminate his need for gratification. Z continued his MO of writing to the newspapers for notoriety, but without the murders to put his money where his mouth was, he had to put up some kind of collateral.

This is where the bomb threat came in. It allowed him to instill terror, but not at the expense of his safety or anonymity. The bomb was incidental -- it was the threat itself that was important.

2. Well it sure doesn't make him more viable. Doug suggests that Ted was doing some game hunting on golf courses. And highways. At night. Does that pass your smell test?

3. Ted might have been hostile as of 1969, but he wasn't a bomb-threatener, a terrorist, or a serial killer. He was, however, part of a huge number of badly-adjusted white men who fit the "angry loner" profile that you assign so much value to. It wasn't until years after the Zodiac events that Kaczynski went completely over the edge and began to pull publicity stunts like the ones you compare to the bus bomb threats. I have to ask again: do you think only the Zodiac would remember the fear that gripped the Bay Area after the threats? Do you think that a different craven schizophrenic bent on murder but hung up on his own insecurities would decide not to kill anyone because he couldn't think of an original way to do it?

Doug chimed in:
"Jake, Kaczynski didn't design a lethal bomb until 1985."

Funny, then, that you use Kaczynski's childhood bombs as evidence against him as the Zodiac -- the bus bomb threats being the link between youthful bomb attempts and the Unabomb devices. In one context, it matches your theory; in another, it doesn't.

"He began his bombing spree as the Unabomber in 1978, using bomb designs that were so feeble as to have been little more than practical jokes."

Regardless, they display a knowledge of practical effects that were missing from the Zodiac diagrams. The bus bombs were theoretical, but Kaczynski's early fertilizer bombs and later pipe bombs were grounded in reality.

"But if the suspect is an asexual, has expressed the desire to kill based on sexual frustration, then at some point shows himself capable of killing for motivations of revenge and national publicity, writes letters and graffiti consequent to murder for the purpose of attaining that publicity and uses the credibility fostered by the murders to place threats that paralyze large areas of the west coast, then the fact of his driving a tan car, or resembling the composite, or writing in code become something far more than mere quibbling points. Kaczynski outranks these other suspects because he possessed the appropriate psychological profile one would expect of Zodiac, from which motive and intent can be easily rationalized."

I'll agree that Ted's nature is probably similar to the Zodiac's, but all of the other motives and methods you describe are phenomena that indicate derivitivation, not identical authorship. The other factors are overly vague -- we're not even sure that the Zodiac's car at BRS was tan, and it my not have been the same car as the one at LHR, which was described as white or ice blue; Ted was not a ringer for the composite; and his codes were internally consistent but, to my knowledge, not consistent with the Zodiac cryptograms.

I think we're getting to the point where we'll have to agree to disagree. Smart comments just aren't going to convince anyone, and I suspect that you know that I know you know that.

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

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (211.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.211) on Saturday, April 28, 2001 - 01:42 pm:

What in the hell is "derivitivation?"

By Jake (Jake) (spider-we034.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.195.34) on Saturday, April 28, 2001 - 02:01 pm:

That's the best you can do? Fine: derivation.

--Jake

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (129.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.129) on Saturday, April 28, 2001 - 04:19 pm:

Oh, very well. I thought for a moment you were cussing me in Hebrew.

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-0703.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.42.195) on Saturday, April 28, 2001 - 05:35 pm:

Jake, 1. people like Ted and Zodiac aren't a dime a dozen, they're on a very short list. Could you at least admit this ? 2. Nobody's trying to spin the bomb connection except yourself. By the way, you should work for Al Gore in 2004. Ted's first '78 bomb was crude and you act as if Ted should have had no problem taking out a moving bus in 1970. Ted's interest in bombs predates Zodiac and you're trying to spin and split hairs to refute this.
#2 is a great example of your spin attempts. You originally imply that Ted is less viable because the murders began in Vallejo. I then counter saying this is a bizarre statement. You then reply "well it doesn't make him more viable". I don't believe it does either.
On # 3 What you wrote has no substance at all. All you are saying is you don't believe Ted is Zodiac. I know this already.
In your writing you also say Zodiac turned to bombs only after being scared off from his usual routine ? That's a good point Jake, are you finally starting to see the light ? "bomb threats allowed him to instill terror, but not at the expense of his safety..." This is the bridge to sending mail bombs, and then kill and terrorize. That's the evolution process you find silly.
Jake i believe this debate is valuable, however let's agree not to spin, because now you are impLying Kaczynski is less viable because there was a golf course near the murder scene. Friendly Debate ZK

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-wi074.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.197.54) on Saturday, April 28, 2001 - 10:59 pm:

look -if TK was not there, then he was not there--did he know how to teleport?

By Linda (Linda) (207-172-73-183.s183.tnt1.fdk.md.dialup.rcn.com - 207.172.73.183) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 04:45 am:

Sylvie...

To date, there is no "proof" that has been provided of TK's absolute and specific whereabouts during the Zodiac period. To say that he was "not in the area" doesn't fit the bill for we positively know that Ted would take time to travel (by various modes) in his role as the Unabomber to commit his crimes.

Until there is any kind of "substantiated" and "verified" proof of his specific whereabouts, Ted most assuredly deserves a front row seat on the strong suspects list just like the others...each of course, for different reasons and/or similarities to known Z-like characteristics.

I say the same for each of the key suspects here. There must be "proof" provided for their specific whereabouts during the Z crimeframe... Until then...

By Jake (Jake) (spider-wb031.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.192.161) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 06:00 am:

Doug wrote:
"I thought for a moment you were cussing me in Hebrew."

I wouldn't dream of it -- remember the trouble "El Shaddai" got for that?

--Jake

By Jake (Jake) (spider-wb031.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.192.161) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 06:20 am:

ZK wrote:
"1. people like Ted and Zodiac aren't a dime a dozen, they're on a very short list. Could you at least admit this ? 2. Nobody's trying to spin the bomb connection except yourself. By the way, you should work for Al Gore in 2004. Ted's first '78 bomb was crude and you act as if Ted should have had no problem taking out a moving bus in 1970. Ted's interest in bombs predates Zodiac and you're trying to spin and split hairs to refute this.
#2 is a great example of your spin attempts. You originally imply that Ted is less viable because the murders began in Vallejo. I then counter saying this is a bizarre statement. You then reply "well it doesn't make him more viable". I don't believe it does either.
On # 3 What you wrote has no substance at all. All you are saying is you don't believe Ted is Zodiac. I know this already."

1. I'll admit that they're on a shorter list than, say, amateur profilers. I will not admit that the list is limited to one. You can call this spin, but you'll have to refute the existance of George Metesky, David Berkowitz, Heriberto Seda, and the killer of Cheri Jo Bates.

2. The fact is that remote lovers' lanes in a barren industrial zone are strange places for a disaffected mathematics professor from Illinois to be acquainted with. The Zodiac's knowledge of Benecia and Vallejo imply a native to me. What do they imply to you? I still haven't heard your theory.

3. You first implied that Ted was a "hostile, bomb threating, terrorist-like serial [killer] in the Bay area in 1969." I responded that "Ted might have been hostile as of 1969, but he wasn't a bomb-threatener, a terrorist, or a serial killer." If that doesn't make sense to you, then you aren't the expert you think you are. I further implied -- and I'll state it outright here since subtlety is obviously not your strong suit -- that Ted remembered the power that the Zodiac held over the Bay Area, and used certain of Z's tactics to gain that power. You seem to believe that, since Z and TK both used similar actions, they must be the same person. Would this, then, make Ted Kaczynski the NY Zodiac as well? Wait -- was George Metesky wrongly imprisoned?

I do not agree that this debate is valuable. I think it's probably over.

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

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-td062.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.17.177) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 06:56 am:

Unless you actually lived in the area, you wouldn't know that people from outlying areas (ie, Vallejo, Napa, etc) go to Berkeley, SF and other happening places; people from SF and Berkeley as a rule don't have any reason to go to Vallejo. That's just how it is today, and probably more so in the late 1960's. So, it seems highly unlikely that someone from Berkeley would happen to choose a remote spot between Vallejo and Benicia to start a reign of terror as a serial killer, unless he was actually from that area. Not impossible, mind you, but highly unlikely.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (104.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.104) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 08:02 am:

Ed (and Jake) I think I mentioned before that Kaczynski had a strong, passionate dislike of urban areas, and especially urban noises. Airplanes, motorcycles, lawn mowers, dog barking all set him off. He craved isolation, which is one very good reason to suppose that he might have gone outside of Berkeley to the isolated areas around Lake Herman Road looking for quiet and solitude. True, Ed, the average shmuck probably wouldn't have done it, but Kaczynski wasn't your average shmuck. When in Montana, and without a car, Ted used to hike miles and miles through some very harsh wilderness area to get away from the relatively minor logging and road-building work that was threatening to destroy the solitude of his own retreat. Not only that, but in certain instances he lamented the fact that he couldn't kill the people who were doing it because it was happening too close to home, and he might be suspected.

Jake, your comment that "the fact is that remote lovers' lanes in a barren industrial zone are strange places for a disaffected mathematics professor from Illinois to be acquainted with," contains a generalization about mathematics professors from Illinois that is unworthy of anyone seriously interested in the solution to a murder case. First, it is not a "fact," and second, mathematics professors, whether from Illinois or not, come in all sizes, shapes and flavors outside of the mathematical mindsets and abilities which they share.

Also, Jake, if someone like David Berkowitz had been in the area at the time, or taking very long car trips out to the area at the time, I'd reckon him a pretty good suspect until I saw an alibi.

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-1227.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.37.211) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 08:45 am:

Spinmaster Jake, 1. I know the list isn't one. 2. I find it hard to believe you want a theory for why a killer looking to attack a couple would troll around an isolated lovers lane area. 3. It doesn't make sense because this is a debate about the possibility of Ted being Zodiac and all #3 adds up to is you don't think Ted was Zodiac.-"Ted wasn't a serial killer in 1969". I believe he was but it is based on the whole ball of wax, despite your spin attempts to minimize my observations.
Ed, I agree with Doug. Let's get serious here about what we use to diminish a suspects viability.(see # 2) This geo-profiling is out there, but are you also saying police would be more interested in a Vallejo suspect than a Berkeley one ?

By Classic (Classic) (spider-wi081.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.197.56) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 12:43 pm:

Doug: I am curious as to why TK, who hated urban and technology,etc, would kill couples in secluded areas? Why not kill people who were really contributing to the degredation of the world? And why would he change the people he targeted? I am not taking sides, just asking questions I honestly do not know the answers to. Classic

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (83.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.83) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 03:54 pm:

Classic, it's because the things that ticked him off changed as he aged. He didn't become a luddite until some point in 1970 or 1971 when he read Jacques Ellul's "The Technological Society." If you look at his problems up through 1969 you can see that what was really eating him then was sexual frustration. He was always looking for some convenient scapegoat upon which to lay the blame for his troubles; some class of victim that symbolized the hostile forces that he felt were keeping him from realizing fulfillment in life. What more natural class of victim then, given what we know of his sexual and social shortcomings, than those young people in parked cars, where it could be assumed they were trysting?

Once he got to Montana, and had isolated himself from the scenes that had perturbed him (the free love/sex atmosphere of 1969 Berkeley) he spent a relatively calm few years before encroaching civilization set him off again.

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-td064.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.17.179) on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 11:20 pm:

Douglas and ZK: the point was, since TK had a problem with the 'burbs, he'd have no reason to go to the outskirts of Vallejo/Benicia in 1968-69, especially considering that he was living in Berkeley. Why pick LHR/BRS, just minutes away from noisy urban Vallejo? There were (and still are) lots of much less developed areas for peace and quiet. True, it was (and still is) rather peaceful on LHR, but there is a refinery not far from there, and I believe it was already in operation by 1968 (it was certainly under construction then if it wasn't completed). There was also, judging from the opening chapter of Zodiac, a lot of traffic in that area too, even at night. While TK was not your average schmuck, it doesn't make sense to me that he'd look for an isolated area to enjoy it's solitude, find LHR with civilization encroaching upon it, and then go back there at least once to kill a couple at random. Why not find a better spot and never return to LHR?

Or are you suggesting, Douglas, that TK went out there for peace and quiet one night, and happened to find Faraday and Jensen the only time he was there, and in a sexually frustrated rage decided to kill them with a gun he happened to be carrying (maybe he was in the habit of carrying guns, I don't know offhand)? Then after that, he returned to Vallejo six and a half months later to kill again? Why not stick with Berkeley? Or why not pick another locale? That's one thing that bothers me about TK being Z. It makes no sense to me that he should choose Vallejo to start a reign of terror.

Douglas, we're both speculating as to why/why not. Can you give me anything more concrete? Being a resident of the area (living 8 miles from LHR and 4 from BRS for 10 years), I've given some reasons based on my own observations of what the natives (and imports, such as myself) do here, along with reasons why TK likely wouldn't want to go to Vallejo anyway, which make it difficult for me to accept that he did.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (116.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.116) on Monday, April 30, 2001 - 12:46 am:

Ed, Vallejo would have been just far enough from home for Kaczynski. True, as the Unabomber he used to go as far out of the way as Sacramento and Salt Lake City (in the former case causing profilers to opine he had to have been from northern California), but relatively speaking, Vallejo would have been fine for someone like Kaczynski living in Berkeley.

Aside from educated speculation, I can't get into the head of Kaczynski to tell you why he would have chosen one locale over the other, but you might want to speculate and tell me why a resident of Vallejo would want to go all the way to Lake Berryessa to kill?

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-td064.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.17.179) on Monday, April 30, 2001 - 12:56 am:

Douglas: Lake Berryessa is a favorite getaway for many people in this area. It's not that far from Vallejo, and a resident could get there within an hour and a half. It's good for fishing, boating, skiing, swimming and hiking. I'd suspect that many, if not most people in this area, including Vallejo, have been there, and are familiar with it. If Z wanted to keep the authorities guessing, I can see why he'd choose LB. It's not like it was unfamiliar territory.

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-0729.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.42.221) on Monday, April 30, 2001 - 07:36 am:

Ed, I still find it hard to believe that you and Jake are requesting a theory on why a killer targeting a couple would choose an area where he found what he was looking for. It's possible the first murders were a 2nd degree situation but more likely is both were planned. You seem to suggest only Vallejo area residents should be investigated ?
The problem with the recent debate is that it is spinning out of contol. Jake is suggesting that a bus connection between Z and a suspect is as good as a bomb connection. He also implies Metesky, Seda, and Berkowitz are just as good as suspects as Kazinski. If Ted is such a weak suspect, I'm sure we wouldn't be dicussing why Ted chose an isolated lovers lane in order to strike at a couple. Ed and Jake since there is no city called Kaczynskiville, why not Vallejo. Did Zodiac show interest in attacking couples. Yes. Did Zodiac find those couples in Vallejo. Yes. Why Kaczynski can't be Zodiac? Some murders were commited in Vallejo so Ted is an unlikely suspect. That's bizarre.

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (ac87c3f7.ipt.aol.com - 172.135.195.247) on Monday, April 30, 2001 - 11:07 am:

ZK wrote:
"Some murders were commited in Vallejo so Ted is an unlikely suspect. That's bizarre."

A vast majority of serial killers are active in areas they are very familiar with, and Ted can't be placed in Vallejo.

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-tc051.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.17.41) on Wednesday, May 02, 2001 - 04:51 pm:

ZK: what I'm getting at is not that it's impossible, but highly unlikely, that TK, being from halfway across the country and living in Berkeley, would happen to choose the outskirts of Vallejo/Benicia as his killing grounds, which, if he really was looking for peace and quiet, was not a really good choice anyway.

Weak or strong, TK is still a suspect, and Douglas certainly has pointed out many odd things about him, and drawn some interesting parallels between TK and Z. However, I am far from being convinced that he must be Z, and one of the things that I must take into consideration is the geographical/sociological aspect, as I've pointed out before. As a rule, people from Berkeley just don't go to Vallejo. There's nothing there for them (unless they're from Vallejo in the first place). Especially anyone from another state far from here; Vallejo would be completely unknown territory for them.

In fact, I lived near Vallejo for a few years before I even bothered to go out exploring it, and I lived only half a mile north of the city limits! That is another reason I have difficulty in accepting someone from farther afield, ie TK from Illinois in Berkeley, coming to what is essentially a foreign city in a foreign state and being comfortable enough to kill, not just once, but three times out of four on two different occasions.

And he was comfortable and knowledgeable enough with Vallejo to choose to make a phone call to the police from a phone booth about half a mile from the sheriff's department, (since he called NPD on 9-27-1969 from a phone booth a few blocks from the police station, me might infer that it was intentional and not random on both occasions). Why would someone from Illinois, living in Berkeley, who is looking for peace and quiet in the country, instead come to noisy, bustling Vallejo, start setting up his crimes by scoping out the town, looking for the sheriff's department, a nearby phone booth, etc etc? Surely, this must have taken days to do, and been very difficult for someone who hated the city. A native, however, would be very familiar with the area.

Since serial killers tend to commit crimes in areas they are familiar with and comfortable in, I tend to suspect that Z was from Vallejo or somewhere nearby, and not twenty miles away in Berkeley or somewhere else.

ZK, if you can't understand that, then there's nothing more I can say. I'm not saying it's impossible, just not very likely. Can you give me any good reasons why it would be likely?

By ZK (Zander_Kite) (a010-1229.stbg.splitrock.net - 64.196.37.213) on Wednesday, May 02, 2001 - 07:24 pm:

Ed , your argument is noted and Ted starting his Una campaign in Illinois is consistent with what you're saying. First of all Ted was 20 miles from Vallejo. I've ridden my bike 35 to check out countryside areas (then of course rode 35 miles back).
I think whoever zodiac was, he spent time trolling and may have been looking for a couple on Dec 13, 68 for example and didn't find anything. Also you say" as a rule " but Ted is an anarchist(spin). But also with the position you take, you'd have a hard time explaining Bundy's behavoir. I'll have to stick to my original observation, that being I find it strange that a theory is needed to place Ted in Vallejo. If he can travel hundreds of miles to commit a Unacrime, why not 20 ? Wow, i didn't know it was only 20. All this over 20 miles. Now, i'm actually starting to think Ted is diminished because Vallejo is too close for the cautious killer.
Since we are at a standstill maybe others can give their opinion on this debate?

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-ta011.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.16.21) on Wednesday, May 02, 2001 - 07:44 pm:

There are always exceptions to the rule, and TK certainly was... as the Unabomber. Bundy was too, and so on. But, we're talking about how TK was post-1978. In 1968-69, the time of the known Z crimes, would he have bothered to go to Vallejo to troll for victims? As I've pointed out before, it seems highly unlikely that he would. But not impossible.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (246.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.246) on Wednesday, May 02, 2001 - 11:33 pm:

That is another reason I have difficulty in accepting someone from farther afield, ie TK from Illinois in Berkeley, coming to what is essentially a foreign city in a foreign state and being comfortable enough to kill, not just once, but three times out of four on two different occasions.

But as the Unabomber, Ted lived in Lincoln, Montana, and traveled by bus to Salt Lake City and Sacramento to hand-plant his bombs near computer stores in the latter and a strange college campus in the former. It was Ted's particular nature to commit his crimes away from his home base.

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-tb064.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.16.179) on Thursday, May 03, 2001 - 12:25 am:

Douglas: that was post-1978. What was he like that a decade before? Specifically, in 1968-69? You wrote above on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 06:07 pm:

His anti-technology views were formed at some point between 1970 and 1971, after reading the works of Jacques Ellul. Prior to that he was a very angry, socially and sexually frustrated individual, full of blind rage, and vindictive to the point of murder.

The point is, people change, and TK did too shortly after the Z murders ended in 1969, as he redirected his rage in a new direction. How do we know that with that new direction came a desire to target people and places in areas quite distant from his home? Maybe he came up with that idea when he began to form his anti-technology views, and not before.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (204.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.204) on Thursday, May 03, 2001 - 01:39 am:

Ed, the answer to that is that some qualities that people bear tend to be innate, while others are learned. A tendency to caution, for example, is probably part of the overall personality, while adherence to a particular political philosophy can, and often does, develop as the result of exposure to that philosophy.

Using myself as a particular example, I have always been somewhat introverted in character, the result of having been fraile and sickly in youth, but it wasn't until around the age of 22 that I became a political conservative, the result of reading works by Marchenko and Solzhenitsyn. Up until that point I had been apolitical, or perhaps slightly left-leaning.

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p167.as1.virginia1.eircom.net - 159.134.234.167) on Saturday, June 23, 2001 - 10:19 am:

Douglas,
I wanted to respond to your post in the Zodiac/Arson thread and also to run a few things by you.I thought this was the most appropriate place.
You made a good point about the time delays in Zodiac's letters.On your point about why anyone would think Zodiac came from the Bay Area;in response I would point to the Isolated location
of the murder sites and the time they were committed.
Ted won the Sumner Meyers Prize for his thesis on Boundary functions in 1967.Would this not give the impression that he was in control around this time,his mind occupied.
He strikes one as being Frugal and more so after
he left his job in 69.Yet we have reports of Zodiac using different cars and weapons.
Would it also be fair to suggest that Ted seemed to be the type to hold on to things.I am not suggesting he was dumb enough to hold on to murder weapons but if he was Zodiac I would have expected they would have been something found.
Going back to his own school days,he does have always seemed to have had a fascination with bombs
Assuming he was Zodiac,do you not think he would have actually used one and sooner rather than later?.
I only put these forward as impressions.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (239.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.239) on Saturday, June 23, 2001 - 12:41 pm:

Lapumo--In regard to the isolation of some of the killing sites I would merely point out that an individual having a routine knowledge of the area, as opposed to an intimate knowledge gleaned from long residency could just as easily have located the sites. I give that opinion based only on the actual facts as I understand them, and not on some of the wilder speculations as suggested by Graysmith. Kaczynski was no lifelong northern CA resident, yet even after ten years he knew Berkeley and Sacramento well enough to cause the FBI to strongly suspect him of being a resident.

Ted won the Sumner Meyers Prize in 1967, but in 1966 he was busy formulating plans to murder people after having experienced a long period of sexual frustration in which he fancied himself as being a woman and seeking consultation with a psychiatrist about a sex change operation. In fact, these frustrations seem to have set at the end of the spring term, 1966, when, for the first time in his life, he actually had some time on his hands. His dissertation had already been written the year before in the form of two papers that had been published in prestigious mathematical journals. When he reached a mathematical impasse regarding a certain proof, he was obliged to fall back on the earlier material. Hence his only academic work during the period Fall 1966 through Spring, 1967, consisted of concatenating those papers and typing them up.

Ted was indeed frugal, not only during his tenure at Berkeley, but at all other times. However, the one thing he would spend money on was his criminal activity, and he even laments to his journals what a costly process it is. I don't think a couple of firearms purchases would have broken the bank in 1969, and as for the cars, I don't see any evidence of more than one car being used in the Z crimes, unless, of course, we subscribe to Graysmith's fantasies.

Ted indeed liked to hold on to things, which led to his downfall as the Unabomber. But remember, Ted has risked his life and continues to risk his life to prove that his crimes as the Unabomber were motivated philosophically, and not the product of a "sick" mentality. I don't expect he would ever take credit for the Z crimes, or take any pride in holding on to memorabilia from them, especially if it would lead to his association with them.

As for bombs, he wasn't able to produce a good, functioning bomb until 1978, and wasn't able to produce one that actually killed until 1985. He had a fairly good knowledge of explosives, but not electronics.

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p24.as1.dungarvan1.eircom.net - 159.134.234.24) on Sunday, June 24, 2001 - 07:06 am:

Douglas,Thanks for the reply.Like I said I only put forward a few impressions,having read little about him up to now.
I am not disagreeing with your responses in any way,but I would like to add to my original impressions.When I spoke about Zodiac being a resident of Vallejo,I meant someone who was very familiar with the Area and who was living/staying there for a period of time,as opposed to someone passing through.If you take LHR,it's ,I believe,five miles outside town.Take the time of the murder the phone call after,suggests someone who knew the area well.Similiar associations can be made for BRS.The question for me is,did Ted live here for a short period at that time or did he have time at some stage to familiarize with the area?I do not ,for instance,see Ted driving around in the hope of finding a victim.Ted for me would have to plan.
Depending on whether you believe CJB was a Zodiac victim or not.Her murderer would also have to be put in the location,and I believe he was familiar with her.Does Ted fit here? Allen doesn't.
I suppose my biggest problem with TK at this time
lies in the magnitude of the crimes of both Zodiac and the Unabomber.As you pointed out,the fact that he held on to things led to his downfall
as the Unabomber.I would suggest that had he thought he was under suspicion as the Unabomber he would have "cleaned house".
If he was Zodiac,with that ego,and as a person who liked to hold on to things,what reason would he have to get rid of everything?Especially when he never came under suspicion for those crimes.
I am not sure Douglas,I was under the impression
that the Zodiac bomb would have actually worked
albeit,not on the side of a hill using the sun as a trigger mechanism.It also I thought showed a reasonable knowledge of electronics!

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (120.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.120) on Sunday, June 24, 2001 - 07:47 am:

Lapumo--Go to my web page and have a careful look around and you'll find the answers to most of your questions (some of it is still under construction, but almost everything is in place by now).

Ted lived in Berkeley for two years and from the little we know about this period in this life he appears to have gotten around. He took up deer hunting for the first time and his brother told the FBI that he hunted "in northern California." Based on what we know about his peregrinations in later years, he probably got around quite a bit, familiarizing himself with the area. He certainly knew Sacramento, Oakland and Salt Lake City well enough to get around in those cities, and I suspect the same would have been true for the SF Bay area. Of course this is only a suspicion, based on what I know about Kaczynski. The documentation from those two years is very sparse.

Supposing that he was involved in the Bates murder, all we have to go on is his signature for an application to UC Berkeley on December 22, 1966. Whether he submitted the application in person or by mail isn't known. There is no reason to doubt that he didn't visit Berkeley at some point, probably in the spring, of 1967. According to the director of public relations at Berkeley in 1997 there was no way he would have been taken on "sight unseen." He would have been obliged to visit the campus for interviews and perhaps a demonstration of his teaching ability. By summer of 1967 he had been hired and headed out to Berkeley to take residence there.

The bomb designs, in my opinion showed a rudimentary knowledge of explosives and a theoretical (not practical) knowledge of electronics. To have made the bombs worked would probably have required sophisticated alignment tools as well as initiators, which are not seen on the diagrams.