Message Board
Register  |   |   |  Calendar
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
JCloser

Registered:
Posts: 11
Reply with quote  #1 
Diamond,

Since much time has passed and there has been so much more presented on this board--black Dahlia, lipstick etc--what do you currently believe today?

For me, its been a long time--since I left the board actually--since I've actually thought about this case.  For me, nothing has changed, I don't believe any of the outlandish claims made here on this board.  I still believe in a basic Z, a guy who only was Z and nothing more.  A guy responsible for the killings attributed to only the Zodiac.  If you recall, back in those days I was one of the 1st to really push hard for a multiple Z theory.  I still believe in it.  I know Margie has an interesting new theory, what do you still believe after all this time? 
DiamondD

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 716
Reply with quote  #2 
JCloser

My view of Z has not really changed since we where all on this board discussing. My opinion is that if by some miraculous unforeseen circumstance that somehow exonerates JT as Z, then I believe Z was a person who has remained under the radar all this time, and is not one of the many "suspected" would be Z's currently being talked about.

I remember your multiple Z theory, and I do still believe there just might be something to that.
DD

JCloser

Registered:
Posts: 11
Reply with quote  #3 
That's my take as well.  I still believe that the master mind Z was a sophisticated dude who had some blue color guys actually executing the plan.  1 person writes, another person kills and the 2 (maybe more) never will match up.  To this day I take Z at his word.  His letters said "this is the zodiac speaking"  The definition of Zodiac means "circle of animals"  I mean that pretty much sums it up and explains a lot of the evidence! 
TerryB

Registered:
Posts: 920
Reply with quote  #4 
What I believe is based on documents that already exist in the public domain.

LTR-G.jpg  double-postage-zodiac-avenger.jpg  I don't think that Dr Hodel was a killer, just a patsy. The images in Steve Hodel's books that he claims are of E. Short are most certainly not her, her family says the same thing. Otherwise I agree with most of Steve Hodels points and observations. There's no good evidence that Dr Hodel was involved in murder. He was a womanizer, not a killer.


__________________
One small bit of info might make all the difference.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply


Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!