9 ms·

This would indeed be convincing, but I can't seem to find any further information on it. Here is the Case Breaker's blog announcement[1]. And here is a press r

by apeace 5y ago

This would indeed be convincing, but I can't seem to find any further information on it. Here is the Case Breaker's blog announcement[1]. And here is a press release from them with some details of their work[2]. I'd really like to see this in action, but it seems like they haven't published it yet. Am I missing it? [1] https://thecasebreakers.org/2021/09/the-last-zodiac-victim/ https://thecasebreakers.org/2021/09/the-last-zodiac-victim/ [2] https://secureservercdn.net/166.62.114.250/g9q.07b.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Zodiac-Killer-Press-release-1-1.pdf https://secureservercdn.net/166.62.114.250/g9q.07b.myftpuplo...

kelseyfrog 5y ago
I'm missing something here. I could create a coded message that required apeace to decipher. That doesn't necessarily mean that I'm you.
- philwelch 5y ago
  But there's no reasonable motive for the Zodiac Killer to do so. If he wanted to frame Gary Poaste, he would plant evidence that was more obvious. If he wanted to toy with the detectives who were trying to discover his identity though--which is well within the pattern of behavior observed from the Zodiac Killer--this is exactly the sort of thing he would do.
  - ahevia 5y ago
    Such an important angle to consider this from. Until there’s a DNA match how do we know the zodiac killer just didn’t use the name of some guy he knew? Especially a seemingly uncommon name (maybe it was common at the time)
  - luckyandroid 5y ago
    If he knew one of their suspects names and decided to fuck with them and throw them off the trail, yes, he would use someone else's name. Your leap to judgement of "it must be Gary" is just as much of a leap as "it might not be" - both rely on "knowing" the Zodiac's motives, which no one does, because he's not been identified.
- neuronic 5y ago
  No but it requires you to know apeace. Could be random letters with usernames - ok. But it's a different story with full names in the 1960s. Could have still just browsed the telephone book, but together with other hints it adds weight to the argument.

by apeace 5y ago

kelseyfrog 5y ago

I'm missing something here. I could create a coded message that required apeace to decipher. That doesn't necessarily mean that I'm you.

philwelch 5y ago
But there's no reasonable motive for the Zodiac Killer to do so. If he wanted to frame Gary Poaste, he would plant evidence that was more obvious. If he wanted to toy with the detectives who were trying to discover his identity though--which is well within the pattern of behavior observed from the Zodiac Killer--this is exactly the sort of thing he would do.
- ahevia 5y ago
  Such an important angle to consider this from. Until there’s a DNA match how do we know the zodiac killer just didn’t use the name of some guy he knew? Especially a seemingly uncommon name (maybe it was common at the time)
- luckyandroid 5y ago
  If he knew one of their suspects names and decided to fuck with them and throw them off the trail, yes, he would use someone else's name. Your leap to judgement of "it must be Gary" is just as much of a leap as "it might not be" - both rely on "knowing" the Zodiac's motives, which no one does, because he's not been identified.
neuronic 5y ago
No but it requires you to know apeace. Could be random letters with usernames - ok. But it's a different story with full names in the 1960s. Could have still just browsed the telephone book, but together with other hints it adds weight to the argument.