My Thoughts On "The Hunt for the Zodiac Killer" by Tom Voigt


Discussion of the Zodiac TV mini-series "The Hunt for the Zodiac Killer" should be posted here

My Thoughts On "The Hunt for the Zodiac Killer" by Tom Voigt

TomVoigt
Site Owner
TomVoigt
Site Owner
Joined: 21 Feb 2007, 04:35

14 Dec 2017, 21:30 #1

1.jpg
My Thoughts On "The Hunt for the Zodiac Killer"
by Tom Voigt
Site Owner -- Zodiackiller.com

Television is like that friend you used to have, right up until you realized that every time he looked into your eyes, smiled, and shook your hand, he was also stealing your wallet.

Once you understand that, you'll never again be disappointed by anything you see on television.

In reality, commercial television is not your friend, it is not an educational tool, it is not a public service; it is simply a money-making endeavor, not unlike a used car lot. How it works is simple: The better the ratings for a show, the more a network can charge for commercials to air.

This is nothing new. As a kid I used to watch "Gilligan's Island" and it was always just before the commercial break that someone would step into the quicksand, and then I'd have to wait through the commercials to see if the poor castaway had suffocated. Of course, nobody ever died, not Ginger, not Mr. Howell, but they still fooled me every time and I never, ever switched channels for fear of missing something monumental.

Fast forward to this age of formula "reality" television, shows like "The Curse of Oak Island," "Finding Bigfoot," and yes, "The Hunt for the Zodiac Killer." How many times did Finding Bigfoot fool me into waiting through the commercials, all because at the very last second, the people in the woods FREAKED OUT like something amazing had just happened. Two minutes and four commercials later, it was revealed that Bobo had found a stick. Or Marty had found a leaf floating in the money pit on Oak Island. Not monumental. But it still works every time, or at least often enough that television keeps producing such shows, hence the formula.

You may note that several paragraphs into this article, I really haven't dealt with "The Hunt for the Zodiac Killer" (which I will refer to from now on as THFTZK). That is because even after five episodes and five hours, THFTZK produced so little results that I need to ration them, or this would be a very short piece.

THFTZK.

Fast editing, dramatic music, explosions, backup dancers, shiny things. I'm sure MTV was happy, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

A more accurate title for the show would have been "The Hunt for Vallejo and San Francisco," because going to where Zodiac was known to be was not a priority for THFTZK. Imagine a Jack the Ripper mini series where the on-screen detectives only visited London briefly, and not until time was almost up.

THFTZK featured a cipher "team" that proceeded to make a mockery of cryptography. I hope the face time was worth it, guys. And that Z340 "solution"? Google "Corey Starliper" for something just as credible.   

Male DNA found on the pants of Cheri Bates is new and exciting, but THFTZK is such a dishonest show (don't get me started) that I must question the find in its entirety. We are supposed to believe that Ken Mains (partnered on screen with Sal LaBarbera) noticed an odd blood pattern on Cheri's pants that nobody had ever noticed in 50 years. Then, male DNA was recovered from the area of that particular blood. However, the final episode was sneaky; was the male DNA in the form of blood? If so, that would almost surely mean it was from the murderer of Cheri, wounded during the attack...and that would be huge. Or was the recovered male DNA something besides blood, such as sweat or saliva? Keep in mind that Cheri lived with her father and brother, and all of the detectives working her case were male. Non-blood DNA wouldn't really be all that unusual or compelling. All things considered, had the male DNA been blood, I have to think THFTZK would have made it abundantly clear. It didn't. 

*No detail about the type of DNA recovered from her pants
*No DNA comparison to Zodiac evidence
*No DNA comparison to Zodiac suspects
*Not even a no-brainer comparison to Riverside's top Bates suspect (no, it's not Ross Sullivan), who already had his DNA taken back in 1998 or so

And nary a mention from the show as to why nothing was done along those lines.

After five episodes and five hours, we are left with a nothing burger and no fries.

Oh well, I'm certain that ALL of our questions will be answered in season two. After all, television is our friend.

The more things change, the more television stays the same. Which begs the question: Would anyone have been surprised if Sal had stepped into quicksand up on Mt. Diablo???
Reply
Like

arvinda
Old Newbie
arvinda
Old Newbie
Joined: 19 Oct 2008, 18:13

14 Dec 2017, 21:38 #2

Tom I think they show said that they were able to get a profile based on the small blood drops or something to that affect... Mains alluded to sample size I believe so its possible its the blood DNA
Reply
Like

Uncle Sporkums
Old Newbie
Joined: 19 Jul 2017, 15:52

14 Dec 2017, 21:48 #3

LOL, very well phrased post, Tom. I also have to add that if the "DNA" on Cheri's pants turns out to be former Officer "Bud" Kelley, he may have the advantage of claiming to have been an innocent investigator at that time, despite being a convicted child-abuser. The key evidence is obviously her diary he kept, if he didn't make sure that had been destroyed.
Reply
Like

NOTPAULAVERY
Newbie
Joined: 06 Dec 2017, 13:54

14 Dec 2017, 22:29 #4

Very well said Tom! Aren't you glad you didn't put your name anywhere near this show?
Reply
Like

jackrippr
Newbie
Joined: 14 Dec 2017, 23:04

14 Dec 2017, 23:07 #5

Like I said I wouldn't hire ken or Sal to find my dog if was missing!
Reply
Like

DrDoogie
DOJ
Joined: 05 Mar 2007, 19:12

14 Dec 2017, 23:25 #6

The show drove me crazy by breathlessly announcing that their team had "discovered new evidence" that had been mentioned in the Yellow Book in the 1980s.  The only potentially valuable evidence that they seem to have uncovered is the DNA from Bate's pants, but they merely used it as a tease to try and finagle a second season from this farce.
Reply
Like

Tahoe27
DOJ
Joined: 05 Mar 2007, 18:45

14 Dec 2017, 23:35 #7

DrDoogie wrote: The show drove me crazy by breathlessly announcing that their team had "discovered new evidence" that had been mentioned in the Yellow Book in the 1980s.  The only potentially valuable evidence that they seem to have uncovered is the DNA from Bate's pants, but they merely used it as a tease to try and finagle a second season from this farce.
Sort of like Columbus discovering America...it was new to them, not us.  🙂

Good to see you posting!
"Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers are simple" Dr. Suess   
Reply
Like

arvinda
Old Newbie
arvinda
Old Newbie
Joined: 19 Oct 2008, 18:13

14 Dec 2017, 23:37 #8

you are Native American Tahoe?
Reply
Like

Tahoe27
DOJ
Joined: 05 Mar 2007, 18:45

14 Dec 2017, 23:53 #9

arvinda wrote: you are Native American Tahoe?
Just referring to "us" as in the people at the message boards.  I'm probably not enough to count.  I need a DNA test.  lol
"Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers are simple" Dr. Suess   
Reply
Like

Seagull
DOJ
Joined: 23 Feb 2007, 07:31

15 Dec 2017, 02:46 #10

History Channel has proven to me to be very disappointing.  I don't think that I can look at another show on their channel without wondering what is true and what is misrepresented for ratings and advertising dollars.  They certainly are very adept at dangling the carrot.

Their Manson program "Manson Speaks: Inside the Mind of a Madman" which aired about midway through the Zodiac episodes was just as misleading and lame. 
Reply
Like