Who do you think the Zodiac Killer actually is?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

CaMan60 said:
We don,t know who he was. But he knew about guns. The clues about the gun's he used add to the evidence and give some insight into how he operated.
Most likely he disposed of them after a crime. But looking at this from another angle, he could have kept them.
He knew enough to write (in the original 3 letter's)
Brand of Ammo used Western. Except in one letter he simply wrote Ammo made by Western. A regular guy might have written, Bullets made by Western.
Click to expand...
I think anyone who hunted or had done any time in the military or LE, would also only use the word ammo. MOO
 
GoBuckeyes said:
I think anyone who hunted or had done any time in the military or LE, would also only use the word ammo.
Click to expand...
It has been a while since anybody posted about the gun used by him. There could be some real clues when
looking over the type of guns and brand of ammo used. In this part of the country a small town with One hundred people could have only 25 who have or had anything to do with guns. Of those probably 10 own or have had hunting guns, and
most of them will talk about their hunting trips openly with people they know.
So he must had a past with guns, and not just someone who was doing a prank.
But we still don,t know why he did the crimes.
 
Case Breakers, which includes former FBI agents, law enforcement officials and journalists, issued a statement Wednesday claiming now-deceased U.S. Air Force veteran Gary F. Poste, a 1956 graduate of Port Leyden Central School, was the person responsible for serial murders in the San Francisco area in the late 1960s.

The killer made national news by taunting investigators with cryptic letters sent to newspapers, threatening to continue killing if his letters were not published. In all, the Zodiac Killer claimed to have committed 37 murders, but has never been identified and is officially tied to six murders.

Case Breakers has previously named Poste as the killer, but claimed Wednesday that the group’s founder, Thomas J. Colbert, “found DNA on a 30-year hiking mat once owned” by Poste and that his organization “found the ancestral town of the now-dead Poste, where DNA from a blood relative was offered by a confidential informant.”

The statement claims that days later, “good profiles” from Poste’s relative and DNA from the mat were compared by forensic experts from five colleges and that “strong similarities” were found. While that would likely only demonstrate that the mat indeed belonged to Poste and that he is related to the second contributor of DNA, Case Breakers suggest federal investigators have not properly employed a national DNA databank that the group believes could connect Poste to the Zodiac killings.

Poste, who died in 2018, was raised in Lyons Falls, Lewis County. His mother, Elva, who died in 2009, was born in Pierrepont, St. Lawrence County, while his father, who died in 1992, was born in Parishville. The couple moved to Lyons Falls in 1945 when Poste was a youth.
www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com

Cold case investigators claim former Lewis County man is Zodiac Killer | News, Sports, Jobs - Adirondack Daily Enterprise

WATERTOWN — The man a volunteer group of cold case investigators claims is the notorious Zodiac Killer has roots in the North Country. Case Breakers, whic
www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com
 
Gary Poste does match the description of witnesses who said he was short/stocky, round face, thin lips and big rimmed glasses. Here is his photo in 1974 along with his 2016 unrelated arrest. What are your thoughts? I must say this is quite intriguing. Apparently his wife apologized after his death that she was sorry she didn't have the courage to tell about Gary's monstrous past and that he was a "Very bad Man". His neighbors added he had a warm way of being very caring and nurturing but also had a insanely sadistic cruel side to him when he was hunting wild game as that was a passion of his. As the Zodiac put it "Hunting Man is the most dangerous animal of all" Part of how Z put it "The Game".
Gary-Francis-Poste-324x235 (1).jpgPicture-strip.pngGary-Poste-transport.png
 
Last edited:
I get the impression that this group suffers from "confirmation bias", and that they are blindly focused on one preferred subject despite having absolutely no forensic evidence connecting him to the Zodiac cases.

I still think William Macduff Andrew is the most likely suspect.
 
Oakie said:
I get the impression that this group suffers from "confirmation bias", and that they are blindly focused on one preferred subject despite having absolutely no forensic evidence connecting him to the Zodiac cases.

I still think William Macduff Andrew is the most likely suspect.
Click to expand...
Do you think one day we might know 100 percent?
 
CharlesRedding said:
Do you think one day we might know 100 percent?
Click to expand...
There are so many cases for which I'd say "no," but with Zodiac and modern technology, I think it really IS possible that we'll know some day, for sure. JMHO, of course. [And for "no," the classic would be Saucy Jack, and probably includes the Lindbergh baby, Boston Strangler ... and "the man from the train," though I'd call that one inside the 95% confidence interval in my own belief--that the authors nailed the identity even if it can't be proven with certainty.]

Back on topic, sorry, I agree with the poster who said we sometimes let pretty butterflies distract us from pure fact and reason when thinking about crimes and guilt. I fell hard for this with Graysmith's first Zodiac book: it identified "Lee" (wasn't that the name G used in the first edition?) as a candidate for Zodiac, and stacked 'evidence' to the ceiling in support of it. I was convinced!

Of course, then we learned that DNA testing ruled out Lee (I'd still like to know more about what sample ruled out what other sample) and he couldn't be Zodiac, we are told. And I looked back at the 'evidence' for Lee's guilt in that first edition, and saw clearly: there was no single positive piece of actual *evidence*. Innuendo, suspicion, theories, but not a single fingerprint or solid witness to support it, AFAICT.

I do believe that's what @Oakie meant in the above message about confirmation bias: that first Graysmith book convinced a lot of us that "Lee" was unquestionably the Zodiac killer. The lesson I take from that, personally, is to remind myself often that "unquestionable evidence" needs to be THOROUGHLY questioned before it is accepted. :)

Greetings in passing to old friends; I've been away a bit and I'm glad to see you again. (And "cheers!" to the new friends here.) --ken
 
I think we could theoretically know, 100%, at some point, provided that the relevant law enforcement agencies cooperate. Othram has shown that the technology exists. However, I get the distinct impression that the responsible law enforcement agency(ies) does/don't want to know, (or more accurately, don't want us to know) and I am confused as to why. I read a while back that the "DNA evidence", such as it was, was touch DNA swabbed from the front of a stamp on one of the envelopes....decades after the evidence had been handled by dozens of people, and which therefore was hopelessly contaminated. Why didn't the police take the obvious step of separating the stamp, and collecting DNA evidence from the back? "Incompetence", as an explanation, isn't adequate here. No law enforcement professional would be that stupid.
 
Oakie said:
I think we could theoretically know, 100%, at some point, provided that the relevant law enforcement agencies cooperate. Othram has shown that the technology exists. However, I get the distinct impression that the responsible law enforcement agency(ies) does/don't want to know, (or more accurately, don't want us to know) and I am confused as to why. I read a while back that the "DNA evidence", such as it was, was touch DNA swabbed from the front of a stamp on one of the envelopes....decades after the evidence had been handled by dozens of people, and which therefore was hopelessly contaminated. Why didn't the police take the obvious step of separating the stamp, and collecting DNA evidence from the back? "Incompetence", as an explanation, isn't adequate here. No law enforcement professional would be that stupid.
Click to expand...
Its amazing whoever that jerk was he got away with it. That guy got so lucky after the Paul Stein murder.
 
The first suspect ever that made the hairs stand up on my neck is Paul Doerr. There isn't any physical evidence (not that there is for anyone) but the sheer amount of 'coincidences' is overwhelming and he's in exactly the right place at the right time with literally an identical list of interests/hobbies to Zodiac.
 
Melquiades said:
The first suspect ever that made the hairs stand up on my neck is Paul Doerr. There isn't any physical evidence (not that there is for anyone) but the sheer amount of 'coincidences' is overwhelming and he's in exactly the right place at the right time with literally an identical list of interests/hobbies to Zodiac.
Click to expand...
Maybe one day we will finally know for sure...
 
HopeValleyDevil said:
All handguns, and multiple firearms used. Are they common firearms used by the military?
How old are they? Are they likely ex WWII items?
Four handguns procured from different people or the same?
Still not on today's ballistic database?

Where would the guns come from?
Click to expand...
As far as we know for certain it was just three guns used, possibly just two. In one the four confirmed cases were a gun was involved it was only brandished and that gun while visually identified by a non expert as a 1911 could have eaily been a browning highs power. so we can only say he used for certain two guns, as changing out the barrel on a Browning High power takes about 10 seconds and would account for differences in ballistics markings. So three shootings, and one brandishing were likely at most three different guns, and perfectly plausibly just two.

As far as assertion that semi auto handguns were rare at the time, they were not. Commercially successful semi auto pistols were around since 1880s and widely adopted since 1890s. Fore example 20-round magazine fed mouser pistol was being mass produced in large numbers in 1890s.
They were the vast majority of sidearm/handguns used by the US military at that time. In fact begining in WWI the military transitioned from revolvers to semi-auto handguns. In the civilian/police market they were somewhat less common than revolvers but this was a transition time. One also has to consider context. This was not the UK or Europe, but the US where having 30% of handgun market was 30% of millions of guns per year, and total number of guns near 100 million at the time.

I don't think there is much to learn or conclude with the type of gun/s used in these killings unless we actually recover the specific guns used, which is almost certainly not going to happen. The killer got the drop on his victims, so he could have shot them with a five shot revolver just as well as with a .22, 9mm,or 45.
 
CaMan60 said:
It has been a while since anybody posted about the gun used by him. There could be some real clues when
looking over the type of guns and brand of ammo used. In this part of the country a small town with One hundred people could have only 25 who have or had anything to do with guns. Of those probably 10 own or have had hunting guns, and
most of them will talk about their hunting trips openly with people they know.
So he must had a past with guns, and not just someone who was doing a prank.
But we still don,t know why he did the crimes.
Click to expand...
According to the 1969 Lyndon Johnson commission report half the country's households owned at least one firearm in the 1960s. and small town, means a slower police response time, which would mean more, not less, guns or household protection. Only a tiny minority did any hunting whatsoever.
We don't know he had a past with guns at all. He used an increasingly common gun type, semi auto handguns.
As far as brand of ammo, that is meaningless. Western was a very very common brand making billions of rounds.
 
Diogenetic said:
tiny minority did any hunting whatsoever.
We don't know he had a past with guns at all. He used an increasingly common gun type, semi auto handguns.
As far as brand of ammo, that is meaningless. Western was a very very common brand making billions of rounds.
Click to expand...
He gave us some clues, and even wrote in a letter about the ammo that he used. I find it appalling that you would toss-out idea's about the guns he used. A search online now shows about 25 -30 percent of California households have guns Of those some have one, some have many with the average working out to about 5.
Since The Zodiac used different guns he must have been someone with multiple guns. So where did he get them ? Someone at the time knew this guy and knew he had guns.
But the case has not been solved all we have is pieces of a puzzle to go on.
 
CaMan60 said:
He gave us some clues, and even wrote in a letter about the ammo that he used. I find it appalling that you would toss-out idea's about the guns he used. A search online now shows about 25 -30 percent of California households have guns Of those some have one, some have many with the average working out to about 5.
Since The Zodiac used different guns he must have been someone with multiple guns. So where did he get them ? Someone at the time knew this guy and knew he had guns.
But the case has not been solved all we have is pieces of a puzzle to go on.
Click to expand...
Just MHO: I don't believe @Diogenetic meant to reject any ideas specifically. As I read his (or her) message, it seems to me just to be saying there's no reason to think Zodiac was what we might call a "gun nut." Virtually anybody might well have a small-caliber handgun in the house, then as well as now. Or even several.

My own dad was a liberal college professor but he kept a small semiauto .22LR he used for occasional plinking (I still have that gun; it's older than I am.) You're right that he "probably had multiple guns" in my own opinion--but if he WAS a gun guy, he would have known that rifling marks could be identified to specific guns, so he might well have bought handguns (IMO) for specific events and then discarded them. It's possible he didn't even routinely own a gun--he might have picked up one at a pawnshop for each killing and then tossed it afterward.

As far as "where did he get them?," at the time of the Zodiac killings, where I lived (south Louisiana) you could walk into almost any hardware store, department store, or pawnshop, and buy handguns without any restrictions other than (IIRC) age. As recently as the mid-1980s, my brother bought a .357 at a neighborhood hardware store.

I think @Diogenetic mostly just meant the guns used don't really give us many clues at all--virtually anybody might have left the same evidence, from a little old lady to a crazed cop-wannabe. Just MHO again.

I quite agree with you that we have very very little to go on. And DNA is IMO useless--at the time, nobody knew about it, nobody had any reason to save and properly store samples. This is one that will very probably (again, IMO) never be solved--like Saucy Jack, there are too many possibilities and virtually no actual physical evidence.

Several regulars here (including me) have pointed out how easy it is to read a book or a website and say "That MUST be the Zodiac!" based on nothing but a resemblance to a police sketch and/or 'evidence' that the subject of the article was regarded as eccentric or hostile by a few people who knew him. No actual evidence, just vague suspicions and slanted writing.

The great example of this IMO is that first Graysmith book, which identified "Lee" (being discreet) as Zodiac. Many people, including me, agreed with the book, at first. It sounded so convincing! And then later we are told that he was ruled out (though I still don't know WHY, exactly.)

It's easy to write a book claiming that Junius Brutus Booth, not his brother John Wilkes Booth, shot Lincoln, and easy to pile up suspicions and suppositions and claims about it, and to convince people who don't apply critical thinking to it--witness the Hodel books ("My dad was the Black Dahlia killer! And also the Zodiac! And he shot JFK from the TSBD! And my dad also shot Archduke Franz Ferdinand!"). Lots of vague claims, not a single piece of actual evidence.

I got to rambling there, sorry, but the point remains: the guns-used issue really doesn't narrow the field of suspects. Best! --ken
 
CaMan60 said:
He gave us some clues, and even wrote in a letter about the ammo that he used. I find it appalling that you would toss-out idea's about the guns he used. A search online now shows about 25 -30 percent of California households have guns Of those some have one, some have many with the average working out to about 5.
Since The Zodiac used different guns he must have been someone with multiple guns. So where did he get them ? Someone at the time knew this guy and knew he had guns.
But the case has not been solved all we have is pieces of a puzzle to go on.
Click to expand...
Before 1968 (which is likely the period when he acquired them, if, indeed, they were his), the Federal gov't did not collect records of firearms purchases. Furthermore, he could have purchased the firearms in nearly any state at that time; the pool of potential owners of any of those common guns was enormous. Absent the firearm itself, and a spent bullet retrieved from a victim, there is practically nothing to go on here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 93 more.
Total: 2,700 (members: 94, guests: 2,606)

Online statistics

Members online
94
Guests online
2,606
Total visitors
2,700
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,236
Messages
18,153,685
Members
231,679
Latest member
SERE1
Back
Top