Zodiac: The Movie

Are there two different versions of this movie? I rented one last year and didn't think it was that great. I think Vince Vaughan played one of the lead detectives in that one. They never showed a character playing the Zodiac, just a voiceover.

But then I saw The Zodiac dvd on the shelves at Hollywood Video last week, with Jake Gylenhaal on the cover. I don't remember him being in the version that I saw. Anyway, just wondering if there are different versions out there, because if so then I may rent the one that I haven't seen.

The earlier movie wasn't worth anything; it was trash. However the one that came out about a year ago is the one to see. Frankly, I think it is great. I would however recommend the recently released "Director's Cut" which has two disks; the latter having the interviews of the principles including two of the survivors. I had previously purchased the original (last year's) single disk version after renting it (I seldom buy movies but I developed an intense interest in this case) and then heard about the "Director's Cut" version a month or so ago and I purchased the two disk version over the internet. I use it to study for possible clues. I also have Graysmith's book coming to me that I got off eBay. But to restate, the very first movie was not worth seeing. The one last year with Robert Downey, Mark Ruffalo, Jake Gylenhaal and Anthony Edwards is a masterpiece in my opinion. I've watched it a half dozen times. Most movies aren't worth seeing the first time. The interplay among the officers strikes me so so very authentic it is worth seeing it for that reason alone. Edwards underplayed his role (as he should) but it is was delicious as he discusses whether he would ever eat sushi. It was great. I loved the movie.
 
Zodiac is a great movie....do you all think that the suspect was the Zodiac?
 
Zodiac is a great movie....do you all think that the suspect was the Zodiac?

I do. I have looked at the evidence available and today, as far as I am concerned, found the "smoking gun." Although there is no physical evidence linking Allen, there is a finite amount of circumstantial evidence that ought to be considered before calling it a lock. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, the chances are great that it's a duck.

Anyone, and I many anyone, who claims that there is physical evidence that exonerates Allen is badly mistaken my view. There is no provable chain of custody of any alleged evidence linked to Zodiac such as DNA or fingerprints. If they claim there is, they do not understand what constitutes a chain of custody. Unfortunately too many have glibly pronounced that there is. That is demonstrably false. Absent that, there is no exonerative evidence existing.

One of the problems I can speak to as a former 30 year investigator (not LE) is that it is possible to have too much information. I only recently began looking at this case. When I looked at everything, the mountain of circumstantial evidence is simply overwhelming. I was not a prosecutor but if I were, I would not hesitate to bring a murder one case and I am convinced the case would be winnable on the circumstantial evidence alone.
 
I saw the movie, then read the book, I was convinced the suspect in the book and movie was the killer. Too many things matched and the author was just meticulous in checking out details and following up leads.
 
I found the movie riveting. We began watching it in the evening and I was concerned about the content disturbing my sleep. I dislike slasher horror movies. This was well done, great casting, just great! I loved it.
 
I happened to view a discussion of this case last night. Something was said at the time but the truth didn't really hit me until today but I think it is very close to the truth. I would wish to add to what was said.

While many of us have concluded who the Zodiac was, what few have considered is that there is a cottage industry devoted to pursuing this one case indefinitely. There are those who do NOT wish to see this case solved. It is not in their financial interest for the case to end. It is highly unlikely that there will be a resolution any more than Jack the Ripper, the Black Dahlia case or more recently, the JFK murder. (Oswald did it, in my view.)

There will be those promoting conspiracy and controversy over Zodiac. As in so many cases, the operating assumption should be to follow the money. This case is, in my opinion, little different. That is something that I had never considered. How naive I was.
 
I do. I have looked at the evidence available and today, as far as I am concerned, found the "smoking gun." Although there is no physical evidence linking Allen, there is a finite amount of circumstantial evidence that ought to be considered before calling it a lock. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, the chances are great that it's a duck.

Anyone, and I many anyone, who claims that there is physical evidence that exonerates Allen is badly mistaken my view. There is no provable chain of custody of any alleged evidence. If they claim there is, they do not understand what constitutes a chain of custody. Unfortunately too many have glibly pronounced that there is. That is demonstrably false. Absent that, there is no exonerative evidence existing.

One of the problems I can speak to as a former 30 year investigator (not LE) is that it is possible to have too much information. I only recently began looking at this case. When I looked at everything, the mountain of circumstantial evidence is simply overwhelming. I was not a prosecutor but if I were, I would not hesitate to bring a murder one case and I am convinced the case would be winnable on the circumstantial evidence alone.

I haven't seen the movie, but I believe that this movie follows the premise of author Graysmith that Arthur Leigh Allen was Zodiac, right? If he was, is your statement about prosecution based on circumstantial evidence a theoretical statement?
I may be wrong, but I thought ALA died not too many years ago.

BTW, Tom Voight has a good Zodiac site with active discussion. http://www.zodiackiller.com/

What do all of you think about the letters which have not been deciphered? Don't you think that computer technology could decode them? Might they hold more information about Zodiac's ID? The fact that apparently no work is being done on the authentic Zodiac letters which have never been read has ALWAYS bothered me!

Maria
 
Zodiac, the latest Fincher ('se7en', 'fight club') masterwork. Not to be confused with the vastly inferior flick "the zodiac" released a couple of years earlier, starring Robin Tunney (she of 'the craft' and 'prison break').

Oh, wow; Fincher is a genius with his movies. Se7en and Fight Club were excellent. I'll have to see this one or get it when it's out on dvd.
 
Oh, wow; Fincher is a genius with his movies. Se7en and Fight Club were excellent. I'll have to see this one or get it when it's out on dvd.

Do get the Director's Cut. It will be worth both your time and money. There are some interviews there worth their weight in gold. I have both the original but it is just the movie. The second has both the movie with a couple of insignificant scenes added and several very important interviews you won't want to miss. Study them for subtle clues and direction on how to view the case. They were certainly eye openers for me. Hartnell, for example, was astonishing with his remembrance of details. You'll get the idea.
 
I haven't seen the movie, but I believe that this movie follows the premise of author Graysmith that Arthur Leigh Allen was Zodiac, right? If he was, is your statement about prosecution based on circumstantial evidence a theoretical statement?
I may be wrong, but I thought ALA died not too many years ago.

BTW, Tom Voight has a good Zodiac site with active discussion. http://www.zodiackiller.com/

What do all of you think about the letters which have not been deciphered? Don't you think that computer technology could decode them? Might they hold more information about Zodiac's ID? The fact that apparently no work is being done on the authentic Zodiac letters which have never been read has ALWAYS bothered me!

Maria

Allen died in 1992 and the cause of death was listed as a heart attack with [SIZE=-1]atherosclerosis[/SIZE] but he had had diabetes for years, was very much overweight (nearly blind if I recall correctly, common with diabetes), but only 58 years old when he was found dead on the floor of his residence. I can only imagine the stress he must have been under over the years.

Obviously one cannot try a dead man but my point was that in theory, he could have and should have been tried for these murders. But there was no definitive physical evidence that came forth that any prosecutor would want to run with. But there are some misconceptions that need to be clarified.

One is that there has come to light certain evidence that exonerates him such as a fingerprint or DNA lifted from underneath one of the double stamps that Zodiac sent. I have argued with some knowledge on my part (having worked in this area for years) that unless it was possible to establish a chain of custody of evidence it is essentially worthless. We do not know and will probably never know how that print/DNA came to be placed there. It does not however match Allen's. That's all we know.

It has been stated that none of the handwriting samples match Allen's. Of course he was ambidextrious being a natural left handed person but he could write very legibly with his right hand. But the problem here is that he never produced a genuine written document with his right hand for examination. He did of course scribble something but it wasn't something that could be said to be a genuine exemplar of his handwriting. Additionally, we have two handwriting experts who were at odds with one another. One said it wasn't and the other said "do not eliminate on the basis of the handwriting."

So far as I know the only evidence are the letters and envelopes touched by many people and we can be relatively certain that Zodiac took pains not to leave prints or anything behind to link him. Although DNA was not in use back in those days, DNA came to be known as far back as the 1950s. Allen was by most accounts a highly intelligent individual with an IQ said to be as high as 160 but a complete failure at life and most telling with women. The frustration he must have felt throughout his life must have been palpable. It is known that he hated his own mother and I'm pretty certain that extended to all women.

I won't go on further except to repeat again that there is no chain of custody existing for any physical evidence such as fingerprints, DNA or any other incriminating evidence that could link anyone to the crimes. The best evidence would be the letters/ciphers and the bootprint. They were 10 1/2 "Wing Walker" shoes but my understanding is that no such shoes were ever found in Allen's possession. His shoe size, however was 10 1/2.

But take note of this fact. At the point that Allen was first interviewed by the three police officers at his place of employment, all murders ceased and never occurred again. I do not view this as coincidental. Nor do I view as coincidental that no Zodiac letters were sent during his incarceration for child molestation. And the ONLY letter the chief detective ever received from any of the 2,500 possible suspects came from Allen taunting Toschi for failure to break the case.

One more thing, Bill Armstrong, the second primary detective tried for some 11 days to break the story of Don Cheney, Allen's chief accuser and was unable to do so. There are others who would be called to testify in such a trial. Allen's main defense would have been that the prosecution couldn't "prove" he did the crimes. I would have bet the farm he would not have taken the witness stand.

At the very least, a trial would be held and we would have seen who held the stronger hand. We'll never know, of course, but these are just as few of the issues that would have come to light.

The ciphers are only of interest to me in that they allow the essential information to be relayed which was soon accomplished early on. Other than that, I don't view them as particularly important nor interesting. Zodiac would lie and even lie about his lies. They are interesting artifacts but hardly more in my opinion.

One final point and I will be quiet. Who stands to gain by keeping this controversy alive? As I have said, follow the money. There are people today who are picking over the bones of Zodiac and will keep this case alive for a century or more. As the individual I referenced said, they do NOT want this case solved and I concur completely.
 
The way I understood it the police had multiple sets of consistent fingerprints from the various crimes scenes, most particularly the taxi cab shooting.

They also had DNA from the stamps on the cipher mailings.

Also the initial accuser of Allen had a motive. Allen had molested his daughter.

So I thought that this had pretty much ruled out Allen as a suspect.
 
The way I understood it the police had multiple sets of consistent fingerprints from the various crimes scenes, most particularly the taxi cab shooting.

They also had DNA from the stamps on the cipher mailings.

Also the initial accuser of Allen had a motive. Allen had molested his daughter.

So I thought that this had pretty much ruled out Allen as a suspect.

Allen indeed allegedly molested Cheney's daughter. That's pretty much a given as uncontested. However, it in no way rules out Cheney as a credible witness. It merely casts doubt on his motives.

I want to repeat again and again. There IS NO chain of custody for any of the prints and/or DNA from anywhere.

Evidently this is not well understood. Let me explain how this is done today. Let us suppose that one wishes to establish the paternity of a child. It only is necessary to swab the inside of the cheek of the mother, child and father. After this is done by the technician the swabs are placed inside a plastic envelope that is tamper proof (such as are used to mail order prescription medicines). it is an impossibility to get inside such an envelope without leaving telltale signs. On the other end where the lab receives the envelope it is opened and the samples compared to obtain a match or exclusion. The ONLY way to "beat the system" is to have someone on the inside (on either end) who would be amenable to being paid off to falsify the test results. That has in fact happened and I know of one such case where that person now models a pretty orange jump suit at Leavenworth in addition to a hefty penalty. DNA for all intents and purposes is 100% reliable with the sole exception being of identical twins. (I can elaborate further if necessary) Of course if the lab is sloppy or dishonest all bets are off. The simple remedy is to repeat the tests if there any suspected irregularities.

NO chain of custody existed for any of the evidence taken from any of the envelopes or letters. There was no way to do this. Since it can't be established the prints and/or DNA are Zodiacs, the evidence is worthless. What I find appalling is how many people (having questionable motives) seem to repeat the patently false mantra that Allen has been excluded on the basis of DNA and print evidence. It is absolutely untrue. And I can't be more emphatic than that. If there is anyone who wishes to debate this point I would be most pleased to do so.
 
However, it in no way rules out Cheney as a credible witness. It merely casts doubt on his motives.

Which casts doubt on his credibility. His story also could be impeached as he was shaky on certain dates and such. Everything hinged on whether Allen told him the story before the Zodiac killings went public. Originally, he said that was the case. Later he was less certain.

I want to repeat again and again. There IS NO chain of custody for any of the prints and/or DNA from anywhere.

Evidently this is not well understood. Let me explain how this is done today.

As a matter of fact I do understand chain of custody. I was under the impression that the police departments involved had followed the correct procedures, for their time, in collecting the evidence.


NO chain of custody existed for any of the evidence taken from any of the envelopes or letters. There was no way to do this. Since it can't be established the prints and/or DNA are Zodiacs, the evidence is worthless.

If I understand you correctly, then you are saying that because they, in the 60's, didn't follow today's, '08's, evidence collection procedures, then any evidence is worthless.

What I find appalling is how many people (having questionable motives) seem to repeat the patently false mantra that Allen has been excluded on the basis of DNA and print evidence. It is absolutely untrue. And I can't be more emphatic than that. If there is anyone who wishes to debate this point I would be most pleased to do so.

I would like to see links to law enforcement/legal sites that support your claims. I don't really see that there is anything to debate. Either the evidence is valid or it's not.

Consider this:

When Allen was a suspect, the crimes were fresh. The evidence that was collected had been collected (I assume) according to the accepted standards of the time.

The police had fingerprints, palm prints and other physical evidence. All of this evidence was tried and true. None of it was controversial, like DNA can be.

If they had this evidence, specifically the finger and palm prints, why wasn't Allen charged and convicted?

If the prints from the cab matched Allen, then he was guilty. If they did not then Allen is an unlikely suspect at best.
 
Which casts doubt on his credibility. His story also could be impeached as he was shaky on certain dates and such. Everything hinged on whether Allen told him the story before the Zodiac killings went public. Originally, he said that was the case. Later he was less certain.

As a matter of fact I do understand chain of custody. I was under the impression that the police departments involved had followed the correct procedures, for their time, in collecting the evidence.

If I understand you correctly, then you are saying that because they, in the 60's, didn't follow today's, '08's, evidence collection procedures, then any evidence is worthless.

I would like to see links to law enforcement/legal sites that support your claims. I don't really see that there is anything to debate. Either the evidence is valid or it's not.

Consider this:

When Allen was a suspect, the crimes were fresh. The evidence that was collected had been collected (I assume) according to the accepted standards of the time.

The police had fingerprints, palm prints and other physical evidence. All of this evidence was tried and true. None of it was controversial, like DNA can be.

If they had this evidence, specifically the finger and palm prints, why wasn't Allen charged and convicted?

If the prints from the cab matched Allen, then he was guilty. If they did not then Allen is an unlikely suspect at best.

Evidently I did not express myself well. I have never said that the bullets, casings, foot prints, letters, envelopes, etc., whatever were in doubt. I accept all those as completely valid.

What is absolutely indisputable is that all DNA and fingerprints are worthless because there is no way to establish where or who they came from. At the best, they could only point in the direction of someone who might possess the fingerprints or DNA. It doesn't prove guilt OR innocence.

I've been reading of this alleged exoneration of Allen for some considerable period of time and I find it very upsetting knowing the subject as I do. What I fear is that it will become to be part of popular folklore that is believed by the masses.

Is there even one thing that could be said to have a known chain of custody? I know of none.

DNA is not controversial.
 
Evidently I did not express myself well. I have never said that the bullets, casings, foot prints, letters, envelopes, etc., whatever were in doubt. I accept all those as completely valid.

Okay. What about the missing section (large) of bloody shirt from the Stein murder? Would you accept that, as compared to the swatches they have in custody? They could verify that based on the fabric make up and the blood, against DNA from Stein's family.

The reason I ask this is because I always figured the shirt and the guns (ballistics) would be the case breakers. The "smoking gun" as it were.



What is absolutely indisputable is that all DNA and fingerprints are worthless because there is no way to establish where or who they came from. At the best, they could only point in the direction of someone who might possess the fingerprints or DNA. It doesn't prove guilt OR innocence.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree. I do agree that any successful "solution" would depend on multiple points of evidence not just DNA. You couldn't DNA the cipher stamps and convict solely on that.

I've been reading of this alleged exoneration of Allen for some considerable period of time and I find it very upsetting knowing the subject as I do. What I fear is that it will become to be part of popular folklore that is believed by the masses.

Have you read the Zodiac article hosted at Crime Library?

The author made a convincing case for ALA not to be the Zodiac. Also other suspects have been named although none as consistently as ALA.

Is there even one thing that could be said to have a known chain of custody? I know of none.

Of the Zodiac DNA evidence you mentioned? I agree. After years of repeated analisys and repeated testing they are very likely to be compromised. However, again as you said, any DNA evidence obtained could be exploited to produce other evidence. In other words give them somebody to look at.

DNA is not controversial.

I did not phrase that well. What I meant to say is that DNA can still be exploited by defense experts, as in the Simpson case. Fingerprinting is simple. Lift the print, compare, match or not. Easy to do, easy to understand. But DNA is still mysterious to most people. Defense experts have convinced jurors that DNA evidence is misleading or unreliable.
 
Okay. What about the missing section (large) of bloody shirt from the Stein murder? Would you accept that, as compared to the swatches they have in custody? They could verify that based on the fabric make up and the blood, against DNA from Stein's family.

The reason I ask this is because I always figured the shirt and the guns (ballistics) would be the case breakers. The "smoking gun" as it were.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree. I do agree that any successful "solution" would depend on multiple points of evidence not just DNA. You couldn't DNA the cipher stamps and convict solely on that.

Have you read the Zodiac article hosted at Crime Library?

The author made a convincing case for ALA not to be the Zodiac. Also other suspects have been named although none as consistently as ALA.

Of the Zodiac DNA evidence you mentioned? I agree. After years of repeated analisys and repeated testing they are very likely to be compromised. However, again as you said, any DNA evidence obtained could be exploited to produce other evidence. In other words give them somebody to look at.

I did not phrase that well. What I meant to say is that DNA can still be exploited by defense experts, as in the Simpson case. Fingerprinting is simple. Lift the print, compare, match or not. Easy to do, easy to understand. But DNA is still mysterious to most people. Defense experts have convinced jurors that DNA evidence is misleading or unreliable.

Sure, I accept the swath of Stine's shirt as being genuine. Was there suspected blood from Zodiac mixed in on that swath or shirt? I'm unaware that there is, but even it there was another blood specimen, it doesn't establish it came from Zodiac. I am not sure I am getting your point.

My whole point has been how does one say this or that serve to exonerate Allen?

I have read through Crime Library several times but I never could see on what factual basis anyone could claim that any evidence could possibly state it was exonerating. You might want to look at these two links. Doesn't prove anything but these seem to be seriously considered. You decide.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/ExorcistLetter.html

http://revver.com/video/185865/hunting-the-zodiac-titwillow/

This article was written by Mr. Hedger. I do not make any claim for his veracity as to the story of the two women who related the story. Make of it what you will. I do not know what, if anything, the police forces have done with this material. In any event it neither exonerates nor brings closure to the case. There is a very interesting tidbit in there that caught my attention. See if you can see it. I found it most intriguing to say the least.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/LD2.html

I don't think I have spoken to this yet, but the Director's Cut provides a perfect rationale for Stine's murder if it could be proven. If there ever was was something called a "smoking gun" it would surely be that.
 
Sure, I accept the swath of Stine's shirt as being genuine. Was there suspected blood from Zodiac mixed in on that swath or shirt? I'm unaware that there is, but even it there was another blood specimen, it doesn't establish it came from Zodiac. I am not sure I am getting your point.

My whole point has been how does one say this or that serve to exonerate Allen?

No, I wasn't trying to imply any Zodiac blood was on the shirt. I was just curious as to your opinion regarding it. As I mentioned, the trophies and the ballistics are, in my mind, the smoking gun evidence that would prove or disprove a suspect.

In my mind Allen is a suspect, but not a strong one. I've read up on Zodiac but I'm by no means an expert.

I'll check out those links. I think I've been to the one.

Thanks.
 
No, I wasn't trying to imply any Zodiac blood was on the shirt. I was just curious as to your opinion regarding it. As I mentioned, the trophies and the ballistics are, in my mind, the smoking gun evidence that would prove or disprove a suspect.

In my mind Allen is a suspect, but not a strong one. I've read up on Zodiac but I'm by no means an expert.

I'll check out those links. I think I've been to the one.

Thanks.

I would agree that trophies found in a suspect's residence would indeed be the smoking gun but conversely absence of trophies does not imply innocence. "Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence." (Donald Rumsfeld)

My point has simply been that I would ask for any provable evidence that would exonerate him. I can't find it. To my knowledge all DNA (such as it is) fingerprints, etc., have never been traced to anyone. We don't know how they came to be there.

The Lake murders is a case in point. The actual phone booth was found where Zodiac phoned the police. A reporter drove around Napa and found the actual phone booth with the hanging handset and furthermore there was a fingerprint that was so fresh and wet that it had to be dried to take an impression. The forensics expert took several hours according to the responding officer to search for any possible clues making this site potentially the most useful of all of the crimes. The print was never identified. What does that tell us? Since we cannot know how it came to be there, it tells us only that a print from someone was there but not from who or when it came to be there. It is not exoneration. There is no chain of custody. No officer or official was there to see Zodiac place his fingerprint on the handset. It might have been a jogger coming along picking up the handset and hearing someone on the other line decided to move on down the road. Where is the logic that Zodiac would be so careless to leave a wet fingerprint on a phone handset knowing all the while the site would soon be located? We will never know.
 
Good movie but we now know who Zodiac is and HE IS alive. Look for him to be apprehended soon.

Jenner Beach, CA Homicides -- 2004

Gareth S Penn lived near Jenner Beach then.

Gareth S Penn told me last year in a phone call that his mother would talk to spirits of the dead with a Ouija board.

At Jenner Beach were found several pieces of driftwood with
Devil/Evil faces drawn on them, both victims shot in the head.

In early 2005 Penn moved to Seattle, WA where his son owns a
restaurant.

Summer 2006 two women Cooper/Stodden were murdered in a park near Seattle -- both shot in the head.

Christopher J Farmer of Opord Analytical, an intelligence company, solved the Zodiac ciphers/riddles in 2007. They point to Penn as Zodiac.

Mr. Farmer has also solved a cipher for the CIA and America's
Most Wanted.

Penn fits the profile of Zodiac -- he knows ciphers, binary code, map reading, and was in Army Artillery. He also is interested in the theatre and other things Zodiac wrote of in his letters. Penn is proficient with weapons. Penn lived in locations near all the Zodiac killings, just like Jenner Beach.

On the Zodiac's Halloween Card there was a symbol used by
Zodiac which is also used by Army Artillery, as I said, Penn was in Army Artillery.

Zodiac wrote: If you figure out these ciphers you will know who I am and you will have me.
 
Don't hold your breath while you wait for the arrest of Gareth, cluznar.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
2,148
Total visitors
2,283

Forum statistics

Threads
590,019
Messages
17,929,078
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top