Eric
Newbie
Eric
Newbie
Joined: July 7th, 2018, 12:34 am

July 8th, 2018, 8:10 pm #11

I find that I need to evaluate my own beliefs at times. With the codes it is a common belief to verify a code it has to follow some set of rules. We do not get to make the rules if the zodiac already decided what the rules are and what methods need to be used to get solutions.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 2nd, 2018, 4:13 pm

July 12th, 2018, 3:16 pm #12

Frosty-Uk wrote: Morning Zteve, there's potentially a few more parallels between Zodiac and Joseph DeAngelo (GSK) than I first realised.

Most suspected DeAngelo was in the Military as there was a base opposite the first clump of murders, the guy knew how to use a firearm, could jump 5ft fences effortlessly and he blended into a middle class society without anyone suspecting anything.  Then after all this time it turns out he was in the police force, the first red herring.

He didn't attack couples to begin with, just females until one newspaper suggested he wasn't capable of attacking men, so he changed his attack pattern and started targeting couples to show he could not only tackle men, he'd also make them listen to him raping their wives. (maybe a connection to the thought process behind Lake Berryessa, ie he always attacks in the dark, isn't capable of daylight attacks).

And finally DeAngelos worst attack was on a chap (name escapes me) who spoke up at the Town Hall on ways to stop him. I wonder if Stine simply made a passing comment about Zodiac at the wrong time and as a result got shot with no other motive than for Zodiac to keep his Ego intact and prove Stine wrong.

I think these guys were both very similar and wouldn't be shocked if the motives in the later murders were nothing other than Ego fuelled.
(sorry for the long post, tried to condense things).
How old was DeAngelo in 1969? Thanks
Quote
Like
Share

ZteveMcQueen
Old Newbie
ZteveMcQueen
Old Newbie
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 5:30 pm

July 12th, 2018, 7:00 pm #13

Bolt wrote: You're saying Z carried a gun with him routinely?
It's certainly possible. I used to carry one every day after a relative got mixed up with drugs and some dangerous people. I still have a permit and occasionally carry if the circumstances warrant it. 

This isn't as unusual as some people think. I have lots of friends with permits, plenty of whom carry every day. I was at a church baseball game a few weeks ago sitting next to some friends who had a popup cover for shade. The wind suddenly started to lift it up and a friend jumped up to grab it. When he did his shirt pulled up enough that I could see a pistol sticking out of an inside waistband holster. Until that moment I had no idea he was strapped. I don't think anyone else even noticed it. There's a saying - "don't scare the horses" - meaning don't worry people by letting them know you've got a gun. If CCW holders are doing a good job with concealment you'll never know they're carrying.
Zodiac was a liar. There's no reason to assume anything he said was true.
Quote
Like
Share

Bolt
SFPD
Joined: March 15th, 2018, 1:43 am

July 12th, 2018, 7:15 pm #14

ZteveMcQueen wrote:
Bolt wrote: You're saying Z carried a gun with him routinely?
It's certainly possible. I used to carry one every day after a relative got mixed up with drugs and some dangerous people. I still have a permit and occasionally carry if the circumstances warrant it. 

This isn't as unusual as some people think. I have lots of friends with permits, plenty of whom carry every day. I was at a church baseball game a few weeks ago sitting next to some friends who had a popup cover for shade. The wind suddenly started to lift it up and a friend jumped up to grab it. When he did his shirt pulled up enough that I could see a pistol sticking out of an inside waistband holster. Until that moment I had no idea he was strapped. I don't think anyone else even noticed it. There's a saying - "don't scare the horses" - meaning don't worry people by letting them know you've got a gun. If CCW holders are doing a good job with concealment you'll never know they're carrying.
Interesting. So if the Stine crime was spontaneous and not pre-meditated, he may not have driven by the Bullitt house after all. How would he have gotten away then?
Quote
Like
Share

Frosty-Uk
Newbie
Joined: May 8th, 2018, 6:36 pm

July 12th, 2018, 8:31 pm #15

bookah.ddiction wrote:
Frosty-Uk wrote: Morning Zteve, there's potentially a few more parallels between Zodiac and Joseph DeAngelo (GSK) than I first realised.

Most suspected DeAngelo was in the Military as there was a base opposite the first clump of murders, the guy knew how to use a firearm, could jump 5ft fences effortlessly and he blended into a middle class society without anyone suspecting anything.  Then after all this time it turns out he was in the police force, the first red herring.

He didn't attack couples to begin with, just females until one newspaper suggested he wasn't capable of attacking men, so he changed his attack pattern and started targeting couples to show he could not only tackle men, he'd also make them listen to him raping their wives. (maybe a connection to the thought process behind Lake Berryessa, ie he always attacks in the dark, isn't capable of daylight attacks).

And finally DeAngelos worst attack was on a chap (name escapes me) who spoke up at the Town Hall on ways to stop him. I wonder if Stine simply made a passing comment about Zodiac at the wrong time and as a result got shot with no other motive than for Zodiac to keep his Ego intact and prove Stine wrong.

I think these guys were both very similar and wouldn't be shocked if the motives in the later murders were nothing other than Ego fuelled.
(sorry for the long post, tried to condense things).
How old was DeAngelo in 1969? Thanks
23 - 24 years old.
Quote
Like
Share

dbowman007
Old Newbie
dbowman007
Old Newbie
Joined: March 3rd, 2007, 10:43 pm

September 9th, 2018, 2:04 am #16

Bolt wrote: You're saying Z carried a gun with him routinely?
The gun laws in San Francisco/CA only began in 1969 to require registration.  You could not have a loaded gun in public, but otherwise, I don't know how unusual it would be for many folks to carry their gun/rifle, particularly hunters without drawing attention.  It's reasonable to think he might have been an opportunist at times. I don't think we could rule out his killing more folks than listed.  

 In Galvan v. Superior Court (1969) 70 Cal.2d 851 ... our
Supreme Court was called upon to determine whether a San
Francisco ordinance providing for the registration of firearms
was unlawful because it was in conflict with or impliedly
preempted by the state laws concerning weapons. The court
held that the ordinance was valid because the state Legislature
had not evinced the intent to preempt the field of gun
registration and the ordinance did not provide for a "license"
or "permit" in violation of Penal Code, section 12026.

    Following the Galvan decision, the Legislature in 1969
enacted Government Code, section 9619, which effectively
eliminated any doubt as to the legislative intent to occupy the
entire field of registration and licensing of firearms.
Quote
Like
Share