Link: Copy link
No insinuations there. I flat out stated it in the other thread. I have no problem with anyone proposing a crooked, drug involved policeman might have been party to the Zodiac crimes. As long as they show me evidence to that effect. You're not the first one to have proffered that theory. More than a few have, and one of the more spectacularly bad jobs of it was Harry Martin's 1991 effort in his self owned newspaper, The Napa Sentinel. Even Harry seemed to get confused with the story he concocted, as his series of articles veered from naming Robert Hunter to Larry Kane to an unknown group of cops as the killers. I recognize your theory differs in that you're not naming the victims (in this crime at least) as drug criminals as Harry manages to, but surely you can do better than simply say it was a cop involved with a drug ring, and leave it at that.If there was a even a kernel of truth in that, I think someone in the subsequent 17 years since the Sentinel series or forty years since the murders might have discovered a link between some bad bulls and the killings. Yet nothing beyond the occasional screaming internet post that it was the cops. With no proof.I completely understand your repeated insinuations that I am 'substituting my beliefs for the established facts' in weaving my 'fiction'.
I see myself as being neither. I least I hope I'm not. Since you're mixing responses from different threads (substituting beliefs, etc.), so will I. When I see theories being tossed about that a certain sequence of events "had" to have happened in the postulator's view, with no alternative possible, you will get a response from me. Asking for evidence.As far as your looks go, I'll have to leave that to our female members. Perhaps a poll is in order.Gosh <GreyGhost>, are you always so co confrontatioal and acrimonious?
Talk about odd... That's XXXX XXXXXX, at least I'm 99% sure it is, cause he's my uncle. He eventually went on to be the camp director up at Camp Silverado for many years. He teaches in Nevada now.