Zodiac Killer Facts

Note to the reader: Steve Hodel’s recent Internet article titled THE CSI EFFECT inspired this blog entry, which should be titled, STEVE HODEL & The BSA Effect but, in keeping with the rhyme, I was forced to go with BSI instead of BSA, even though BullSh*t Inventor is not as catchy as BullSh*t Artist. Perhaps I should simply have gone with STEVE HODEL & The CYA Effect instead.

Cover your a** – the number one rule of the Zodiac theorist.

The recent publication of the book MOST EVIL: Avenger, Zodiac and The Further Serial Murders of Dr. George Hodel marks a sad chapter in the unending saga of the unsolved “Zodiac” crimes. Several years ago, former detective-turned-author Steve Hodel appeared on the “true” crime scene with his claims that his deceased father was responsible for one of the most horrific and infamous killings ever recorded, the so-called “Black Dahlia” murder. The sensational case has been the subject of debate, speculation and constant exploitation since the body of Elizabeth Short – carefully severed in half at the waist – was first discovered in a Los Angeles neighborhood in 1947. Along with Jack the Ripper and the Zodiac, the Black Dahlia killer was the stuff of legend. The unsolved crime made for popular entertainment, most recently in director Brian De Palma’s revisionist account of the unsolved crime BLACK DAHLIA.

Hodel’s best-selling book BLACK DAHLIA AVENGER named George Hodel as the killer, and the author’s meteoric rise in the world of the true crime business included appearances on radio and television as well as a movie deal. Even Los Angeles County District Attorney Stephen Kay endorsed Hodel’s theory. However, others found the author’s case lacking in evidence and substance. Many of Hodel’s claims proved unsound, including the theory that a photo found among his father’s possessions depicted victim Elizabeth Short. Hodel’s critics cited the fact that his entire premise rested on shaky ground; his defenders cited the fact that George Hodel was, at one time, a suspect in Short’s murder and was actually named in official documents as such. Without any definitive method to confirm or refute Hodel’s accusations, the theory that George Hodel was the Black Dahlia killer simply lingers in limbo, dismissed by most critics yet embraced by many believers.

Of course, Hodel is not the first person to come forward and accuse a deceased parent of murder; Dennis Kaufman first surfaced at the turn of the century with the claims that his dead step-father was the killer, and now the publicity-seeking Deborah Perez accuses her own dead step-father. Yet Hodel is the only father-accuser given credibility by the mainstream media, and the only one with a publisher peddling his nonsense.

Hodel’s article THE CSI EFFECT is little more than a self-serving attempt to avoid the inevitable; Hodel knows the accusation that his father was the Zodiac cannot withstand scrutiny. He also knows that the day will come when someone will demand that the DNA evidence be compared with that of his father and then he will be exposed for the fraud that he has become. In order to avoid this approaching shame, Hodel has taken a cue from the other Zodiac theorists and decided to attack the evidence first.

There is some truth to the notion that popular crime-science shows such as CSI have given the public the impression that forensic science can solve any crime, and that DNA is a magic bullet in criminal investigations. Indeed, in these programs, authorities obtain DNA results in a matter of seconds, and can even discover a person’s DNA in a room when that individual only thought about entering that room. Hodel wants us all to believe that this fantasy-thinking has tainted the discussion of the DNA evidence in the Zodiac case, and his presentation in defense of that position leaves much to be desired.

The issue at the center of the debate seems to be the validity of the DNA evidence; i.e. is the DNA taken from a Zodiac envelope actually the DNA of the killer? While many theorists accusing suspects who were cleared by this DNA are eager to dismiss this evidence, the San Francisco Police Department has clearly expressed its confidence in this evidence – and rightfully so. As Inspector Kelly Carroll stated years ago, it is unrealistic to believe that that Zodiac took precautions against leaving genetic evidence on the envelopes or stamps because DNA testing did not exist back in 1969. Further, given the fact that Zodiac was brazen and reckless – leaving victims alive, allowing himself to be seen, sending authorities samples of his handwriting, calling police, and much more – the assumption that the killer was driven by such concerns for caution is not supported by the known facts. In truth, if any killer was likely to have licked a stamp or envelope without concern, it was the Zodiac.

Theorists are quick to claim that the DNA is actually that of a detective who handled the envelope or a deranged postman who licked the mail as he made his rounds. As much as these explanations may be tempting – even more useful – for the theorists, the rest of the world cannot afford to accept such nonsense. After all, perfectly usable DNA has been retrieved from envelopes and stamps, some just as old or even older; in some cases, that DNA then identified a specific individual who was, in fact, responsible for a crime. The fact that an envelope has been stored in a police filing cabinet, handled by others, or even exposed to certain temperatures, will not cause the DNA under the stamp or envelope to magically transform into the DNA of someone other than the individual who licked that stamp or envelope. Hodel and others seem to believe that the DNA of a detective or postman could somehow seep under the stamp, obliterate the original DNA, and replace that DNA. In truth, the results would indicate mixed DNA, or the sample would simply be unreadable.

Hodel references the claims made by theorist Mike Rodelli, who has been accusing his suspect, Mr. X, for several years. In 2002, the DNA of Mr. X was compared to the partial profile obtained from the Zodiac’s envelope, and the results excluded Mr. X. In a surprise twist, Mike Rodelli then devoted his efforts to discrediting the DNA evidence (yes, I won the bet in the pool). After interviewing anonymous sources, Rodelli’s website presented the claim that NO DNA was ever found on any of the Zodiac letters during previous testing; the inference being, that if DNA was found, it cannot be that of the Zodiac because none of the other letters contained any DNA. At its core, this explanation is designed to cast doubt on the DNA evidence while, at the same time, portray the authorities as disinterested in the truth. In Rodelli’s world, the SFPD is simply trying to make him shut up and go away, and they are using this falsified DNA evidence to laud over theorists with worthy suspects because they refuse to care about this case.

Steve Hodel has most likely studied the history of Rodelli, Robert Graysmith and others, and he most likely has no desire to follow in their footsteps on the path of public humiliation, back-peddling and desperation. Therefore, he has chosen to act in a pre-emptive fashion and denounce the evidence before that evidence is used to clear his suspect. Like most theorists, Hodel hopes that he is smarter than his audience.

The notion that the DNA is the final word on a suspect’s viability is laughable. As with the notorious fingerprints found on the cab of victim Paul Stine, DNA should only be given great credence when that evidence implicates an individual. As I have stated in the past, if a suspect was found in possession of the missing portion of Paul Stine’s shirt yet his fingerprints did not match those found on the cab, dismissing this suspect would be unwise, to say the least. At the same time, when a suspect stands accused based on the flimsiest of evidence and the fingerprints do not match that suspect, then the fingerprints or DNA could be considered as the last word on a debate that should have ended long ago. This was the case with Arthur Leigh Allen, Mr. X, Charles Clifton Collins, etc., and will be the case with Guy Ward Hendrickson, Jack Tarrance, and now George Hodel. These theories were not supported by credible evidence, the available evidence cast severe doubt on these theories, and these theories were often in direct conflict with known facts and/or presented by accusers with no credibility. When the DNA, fingerprints, palm print or handwriting fail to implicate such suspects, that should be the end of that theory. Unfortunately, for Graysmith, Rodelli and so many others it’s only the beginning.

In 2002, the ABC network obtained access to the SFPD crime lab as it tested several Zodiac letters in search of sufficient DNA in order to create a genetic profile. Dr. Cyndi Holt presented her findings, which excluded Arthur Leigh Allen, Mr. X, and Collins. As she spoke to the ABC correspondent on camera, Holt stated that the DNA belonged to an individual who, at one time, had “come in contact” with the stamp. Steve Hodel splits every hair of the ABC PRIMETIME transcript for his own purposes. To Hodel and other theorists, Holt’s words provided a window of opportunity, a tiny crack through which they can pass and continue to promote their respective theories. Again, the real culprit is a sloppy detective or a drooling mailman, and the DNA does not belong to the killer.

During the recent History Channel broadcast of the program MYSTERYQUEST, a forensic technician stated her belief that a DNA sample obtained from under the sealed portion of an envelope mailed more than 40 years ago most likely belonged to the individual who had licked that envelope. This genetic material was sealed under the envelope flap, as was the DNA sample found under a stamp on a Zodiac envelope. The technician further stated that it was not unusual when testing older items to obtain only a partial profile, as was the Zodiac profile. These comments reflect a simple, common sense – and scientific – approach to the evidence: genetic material trapped in the sealed portion of the envelope or under the stamp is considered more reliable than DNA found on the outside of the envelope, or in the areas exposed to and handled by others. Some may choose to continue attacking this evidence and claim that the DNA obtained from a Zodiac envelope belongs to someone other than the Zodiac. Those who use common sense, the facts, and logic, will most likely reach a different conclusion.

The real problem should be obvious to even the most casual observer: theorists feel the need to attack, discredit and discard all of the evidence in the Zodiac case. From fingerprints, DNA, a palm print or even the handwriting, this evidence is constantly cast aside by those who know that such evidence will expose them as frauds and put an end to their efforts to exploit this case for their own benefit. If anyone is really sitting around wondering why the theorists attack the evidence and employ such methods, you are exactly the kind of person that Steve Hodel and others are hoping will spend 25 bucks to buy a book filled with BS.

MOST EVIL is a perfect example of what has gone wrong in the Zodiac case, and in our society. The cynical nature of such books in the Zodiac, Jack the Ripper and other cases has become so common place that we don’t even bat an eye when we hear that yet another classless clown has come forward with a story that should make even the most jaded among us do a spit-take. Lying, distorting the facts, and doing so for personal profit is now the American way, and Steve Hodel can’t be faulted for wanting a piece of pie. He can, however, be called to account for his crimes against the truth and shamed into thinking twice about ever doing so again. One wonders how Hodel can sleep at night.

Hodel will have his defenders. On another website, the owner uses his real name to promote the book while hiding behind a fake name to endorse the book on another site, posting, “I think he really solved it!” and “Thank you, Steve Hodel! YAAAYY!” Of course, this is all about increasing traffic and hits to websites, and padding wallets. Some less-than-ethical individuals have figured out that its profitable to join in and help others exploit the case if the run-off trickles down to them. In this world, anything goes, and the ends always justify the means.

We should remember that the evidence used to accuse George Hodel can only be described as speculation at best. Steve Hodel has not constructed a circumstantial, fact-based case against his father; instead, he has simply offered a theory supported by nothing other than his own conclusions based on that strained speculation. In the end, there is no credible evidence that George Hodel was the Zodiac, and that is the central issue, not the value or results of the DNA testing. Like all theorists, Hodel wants to put the cart before the horse and then asks us all to ignore the fact that he has no horse to propel that cart. Hodel wants us to talk about DNA rather than recognize the fact that he has failed to provide a credible case in the first place. This same pattern has played out with other suspects in the past, and is at the core of the recent accusations against Richard Gaikowski. The question should always be: What credible evidence implicates a suspect? However, the theorists, accusers, crackpots and opportunists want the question to be: Do you have any proof that a suspect is not the Zodiac? This twisted logic enables the theorists to continue to accuse their suspects when the more practical, fact-based approach would cut them off at the knees before they ever got out of the gate.

Here are three good reasons to avoid Steve Hodel, his book, and his claims:

1) The last time Hodel accused his dead father of one of the most notorious crimes in US history, much of the evidence he claimed implicated his father turned out to be distorted, erroneous or flat out wrong.

2) The last time Hodel accused his dead father of the Black Dahlia murder, he was convinced based on rather flimsy evidence in the first place, even before some of that evidence was discredited or proven false.

3) The last time Hodel accused his dead father, he made a lot of money doing so, and he liked it.

At the time of the Zodiac murders, George Hodel was approximately 60 years old. The oldest witness description placed the Zodiac somewhere in his mid-thirties to mid-forties. There are many other reasons to conclude that Hodel was innocent but, at the end of the day, the best reason to believe that George Hodel was not the Zodiac is simply that he stands accused by Steve Hodel.

Do I think that Hodel actually believes that his father was the Zodiac? No, not for a second. According to reports, Hodel had a movie deal in the works after the publication of BLACK DAHLIA AVENGER, but the deal apparently fell through after the writer’s strike in Hollywood. Perhaps Hodel was in need of cash when he decided to write MOST EVIL. Who knows. One thing is clear: he was sorely in need of an adjustment to his moral compass.

Many Zodiac buffs may feel the need to rush to their local bookstore and buy a copy for their Zodiac collection, but I encourage those who care about the Zodiac case to avoid Hodel’s book like the plague. If you want to read it, go to the library, sit down at the bookstore with a copy, or wait until its in the remainder bins where it belongs. Let’s do what little we can to discourage this kind of shameless, immoral behavior, and show Steve Hodel and the other bullsh*t artists that while they may keep selling crap, we aren’t buying.

More than 20 years ago, the publication of the sensational and largely fictional book ZODIAC inspired a legion of amateur sleuths who claimed they had identified the Zodiac, holding press conferences, peddling books, accusing suspects and telling tall tales. Things really have changed since then – er, actually, nothing has changed at all.

The last two years have been a nightmare for anyone who cares about the case and the truth, and it’s more than clear why those in law enforcement did not welcome the production of David Fincher’s revisionist history film, ZODIAC, a film based on the largely fictional book by Robert Graysmith. The effect of the film has been much like the effect its source material had on the case and society more than 20 years ago – meaning, the film and its opportunistic exploitation of the many already-debunked myths about the case only served to inspire others with even less shame. When society praises and rewards those who exploit the case with no regard for the truth, why would we expect the public to get any message other than – “Exploiting the Zodiac case for your own fame and profit while spitting on the truth and the victims is perfectly acceptable behavior.”

To be fair, it’s not as if the makers of ZODIAC invented the exploitation of the Zodiac case – that began almost as soon as the first victims took their last breaths more than four decades ago. This is, after all, America, where the mantra often seems to be, “Who cares as long as it doesn’t effect me.” Translated into simple, everyday language, this means, “When something bad happens to me, it’s tragedy,” and “When something bad happens to someone else, it’s entertainment.” This logic has fueled the recent wave of those coming forward with claims that they have identified the Zodiac killer.

Years ago, a debate broke out on the old true crime message board regarding the publication of the book DADDY WAS THE BLACK DAHLIA KILLER. Janice Knowlton told a wild story in which her father had not only killed the infamous Hollywood murder victim Elizabeth Short but was part of an underground sex ring that served the Hollywood elite. The book, written by Michael Newton, caused a splash in the media and Knowlton did her best to earn her fifteen minutes, peddling her bizarre, wholly unsubstantiated tales as much as possible. Her campaign led her to the message boards where she and Newton defended their book against the crowd of skeptics and critics who viewed their efforts as little more than shameless opportunism that only further muddied the story of the Black Dahlia killing. As one who had read the book and studied the claims made by the author and Knowlton, I raised questions regarding the veracity of the claims as well as the motives behind the book. In my opinion, it was clear that Knowlton was mentally-ill and that Newton was morally corrupt, eager to exploit the woman for whatever she was worth with little regard for her emotional well-being. In short, it was a quick buck, but Newton did his best to justify his work and boost the sagging credibility of his co-author. No matter how bizarre or unsubstantiated her claims may have been, everyone seemed happy to ignore that obvious reality as long as Knowlton didn’t start accusing little green men from Mars, too. My exchanges with both characters left me convinced that the entire episode was a sad commentary on the world – the whole book was total crapola and Knowlton had no credibility whatsoever, but that kind of talk just interfered with the business of selling books and making money. Who wants to stop and admit that the whole story is pure nonsense when there are talk shows to book, contracts to sign, movie rights to sell. Crapola sells, and people who sell crapola are not interested in selling substance.

After Knowlton faded from the spotlight, no one stopped to care about how she had been effected by the entire episode. The media machine chewed her up and spit her out on cue when she was no longer profitable. When she died in an apparent suicide, Knowlton once again became marketable and, on cue, the media returned to milk the most out of her breakdown and demise. Today, the Janice Knowlton saga is just a sad footnote in the never-ending spectacle that is the Black Dahlia story; this legendary murder case had also fallen victim to the distortions of Hollywood many times over, including director Brian DePalma’s fictional film. Now, others have come forward to accuse their own dead fathers of the crime while the media machine gobbles them up and marches mindlessly forward in search of more mentally ill attention seekers or morally challenged morons to consume.

For too many years, the mentally ill, the morally ill, and the media have infested the Zodiac case like ravenous maggots over a rotting corpse. William Beeman called a press conference and disgraced himself back in the ‘80s when he accused his brother Jack. Beeman sold a book about his amateur investigation for fifty bucks; later, he admitted that he was wrong.

Blaine Blaine pestered every law enforcement agency in Northern California and more with his claim that his estranged friend Richard Gaikowski was the Zodiac; Blaine lived in an alternate universe where he was a credible individual and, unfortunately for him, every one of the members of law enforcement he encountered lived in another universe where Blaine was a brandied fruitcake, and never the two shall meet.

Gareth Penn launched his now-decades-old campaign against Michael O’Hare, accusing the former Harvard lecturer of the Zodiac and other crimes using his own twisted interpretations of the Zodiac’s writings and codes; today, Penn is still at it but, in a fitting bit of irony, he now stands accused of the Zodiac crimes by someone who used his same dubious methods. [O’Hare recently wrote an online article about the sorry saga, almost thirty years after it began – click on the SUSPECTS & THEORIES link and then scroll to the bottom Penn page to read O’Hare’s article.]

Then there was the guy who murdered his friend in what he claimed was a re-enactment of a Zodiac crime, the New York Zodiac or ZODIAC II, the Zodiac killer in Japan, the Zodiac copycat in North Carolina, and any number of other losers inspired by the glorification of the killer and his crimes – all examples of the mentally ill or morons without a conscience. Harry Martin with his 9,745 part special series about the answer to the Zodiac crimes, involving Robert Hunter, Charles Manson, Larry Kane, the Illuminati, the Freemasons, E. Howard Hunt and Hanger 18. Charles Clifton Collins thought his daddy might have been the Zodiac, and he had to go on national television before he’d face the fact that doing so might have been a bad idea.

And now we have even more lunatics adding their names to the list of funny fellows, comic men and clowns of private life who have disgraced themselves in their efforts to exploit the unsolved mystery. Dennis Kaufman has been accusing his now-deceased step-father Jack Tarrance of the Zodiac crimes since 2000; back then, his wild claims and tales did little to impress those who studied the case or those in law enforcement. For some reason, those who are in charge at Sacramento’s CBS 13 television station have taken on the role as Kaufman’s unabashed PR firm; reports from CBS 13 seem to be little more than talking points handed down by Kaufman and unverified by any of the so-called “journalists” at the station.

Sandy Betts claimed that the Zodiac had been following and harassing her for decades; she even claimed that the killer had left his hooded costume in her car back in the 1960s. Yet, of course, Betts could not produce this costume when asked to do so. Howard Davis claimed that the Zodiac’s hooded costume was discovered among the possessions of the so-called “Manson family” and then destroyed as part of an elaborate conspiracy to conceal the family’s involvement in the Zodiac crimes. Davis claimed that his ex-district attorney/ex-brother-in-law told him of the nefarious plot; apparently the source was mistaken – more than three decades later, Dennis Kaufman discovered the Zodiac’s hood in an old piece of stereo equipment among his late step-father’s possessions.

After he failed to convince authorities that he had identified the Zodiac as Richard Gaikowski, Blaine Blaine produced a scan of a book which bore the signature “Paul Stine.” According to Blaine, this book was found among Gaikowski’s possessions; of course, Blaine claims he no longer has the actual book. Deborah Perez produced a pair of old glasses which she claimed her step-father had taken from Zodiac victim Paul Stine.

Despite what can only be described as an undeniable lack of credibility, each of these theorists and accusers still manage to convince others that their claims have merit, and these converts then work to endorse, promote and protect the theorists. Deborah Perez garnered the assistance of a disbarred attorney who once worked with the infamous lawyer Melvin Belli. Perez’s PR machine called a press conference and spoke of a film in the works. Previously, Perez had approached true crime writer William C. Phelps with her story in the hope that the author might embrace her tale as a potentially profitable endeavor. Phelps later wrote that he believed Perez and her story were credible until she also claimed that she was JFK’s illegitimate daughter. Phelps later wrote that he felt as if he had been “duped.” Even on the surface, Perez’s claim that she had accompanied her father during several Zodiac attacks was dubious at best. Those who had studied the Zodiac crimes immediately noticed several problems with Perez’s story, and even those who knew little about the case could quickly recognize the fact that Perez’s wild tale was simply too sensational to be true. The fact that Phelps considered Perez credible only until she allegedly claimed to be JFK’s illegitimate daughter suggests that Phelps might still be convinced of Perez’s credibility if she had simply been a better liar peddling a better lie. The scenario was reminiscent of author Michael Newton’s relationship with Janice Knowlton and the book DADDY WAS THE BLACK DAHLIA KILLER; Newton was apparently happy to embrace and promote Knowlton’s absurd story as long as her lies remained subtle and almost plausible.

Dennis Kaufman seems to have television reporter Cris Pickel wrapped around his finger and he has now attracted the support of a university professor in Arizona. The professor believes that his geographical analysis of suspected murder sites confirms Kaufman’s claims concerning several unsolved crimes. While the professor was happy to add his own endorsement of Kaufman, the professor’s university was quick to note that the professor spoke for himself and not for the institution. Another man stayed awake for several days until he became convinced that the Zodiac’s letters contained hidden messages that further implicated already-exonerated suspect Arthur Leigh Allen. According to the sleep-deprived amateur sleuth, the hidden messages only became visible when viewed on a computer monitor that was tilted to a certain angle. This theorist sought out his fifteen seconds of notoriety and discovered that the media was eager to oblige. Other men and women have come forward with their own claims; these individuals would have remained anonymous thrill-seekers without a media ready to provide a forum for the latest crackpot.

In the late 1990s, the Zodiac story found new life on the Internet. While the public still accepted the theories and solutions offered by author Robert Graysmith, many of the Internet critics challenged this version of the story and consistently exposed the factual errors, distortions, and fraud in the best-selling book ZODIAC. More than a decade after the publication of Graysmith’s “definitive account of the case,” the author’s work proved to be little more than revisionist history designed to implicate his chosen suspect. Those who cared about the case had hoped that the mainstream media would report this important truth, but others embraced Graysmith while endorsing and defending his work, even censoring and silencing legitimate, fact-based criticisms of the author’s many dubious claims. These followers continued Graysmith’s exploitation of the Zodiac tragedy, ignoring the voices of critics who warned that the resurrection of the author and his theories would cause irreparable harm to the historical record and further mislead the public. Graysmith’s Internet defenders launched their own efforts to convict Arthur Leigh Allen in the court of public opinion, and the results influenced the author’s shockingly deceptive sequel, ZODIAC UNMASKED. Long after DNA and other evidence excluded Allen as a suspect and the so-called “mountain of circumstantial evidence” of his guilt had been discredited, Hollywood adapted both ZODIAC and ZODIAC UNMASKED for the feature film ZODIAC – we all know how that worked out.

Howard Davis has turned his Manson/Zodiac conspiracy theory into a mini-career and, like Graysmith, has his own defenders and followers who are eager to overlook his wild claims and irresponsible actions in this case simply because they think he’s a swell guy. Davis’ sensational story of a Zodiac/Manson cover-up was exposed as a fraud by Davis’ own source, Manson prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi and others. Like Robert Graysmith, Davis had defenders and allies to censor and then silence legitimate, fact-based criticism of Davis and his work. The justification? “Who cares if he lied about something 15 years ago. No one believes his theory, no one believes the cover-up story, no one buys his book, and you’re just giving him more attention than he deserves.” When reminded of the moral contradiction, the defenders are not moved and offer this excuse, “I’m trying to solve the case. He’s helping me with my goal. I’m not going to sacrifice that relationship.” If Davis were one of the detectives assigned to a case, or a group of journalists covering a story, and he peddled this nonsense, anyone who actually cared about this case would escort Davis to the door and leave a large boot print on his rear end.

Then there was “Sam,” a non-suspect suspect of sorts, and an Internet-funded investigation that went nowhere. Other suspects surfaced, including an already discarded oldie, Richard Gaikowski. Once the subject of a brief law enforcement attention in the late 1980s, Gaikowski became a suspect only after Blaine pestered virtually every law enforcement agency involved in the case with his ridiculous decipherings of the Zodiac’s coded messages and his bizarre theories. Ken Narlow, the SFPD, the FBI and others had rightfully dismissed Blaine as a crackpot, but others saw opportunity in the discredited kook. Today, Blaine’s theory and suspect have become mainstream, despite the fact that no credible evidence exists to implicate Gaikowski and his accuser is a few sandwiches short of a picnic. Another man and his family are thrown to the wolves by those who claim to care about this case while they, instead, spend their time, efforts and reputations coddling crackpots.

Years ago, Steve Hodel was another newcomer to the world of sensational true-crime claims and the Internet. Back then, Hodel was convinced that his father, now-deceased doctor George Hodel, was responsible for the infamous “Black Dahlia” murder in 1947, and eventually Hodel’s theory appeared in the book BLACK DAHLIA AVENGER. While some embraced Hodel’s theory as the solution to the mystery, others rightfully noted that Hodel’s entire theory hinged on what could only be described as tenuous speculation and assumptions; in some instances, Hodel’s “evidence” was discredited. Yet, Hodel remained undeterred and he has now released his latest attempt to cast a dark cloud over the memory of his dead father – the book MOST EVIL: Avenger, Zodiac and the Further Serial Murders of Dr. George Hodel, in which Hodel claims that Dr. George Hodel was also the Zodiac. That George Hodel was approximately sixty-years-old at the time of the Zodiac murders was apparently the first fact to be thrown out the window as Hodel attempted to exploit yet another unsolved tragedy for personal gain. Some are thrilled to see a new Zodiac book and happily promote Hodel’s latest effort, and once again, the contrast is clear: anyone who actually cared about the Zodiac case would not welcome the publication of yet another book peddling yet another bad theory and yet another bad suspect. Once again, so many of those who claim to care about this case seem far more interested in serving themselves.

When confronted with the fact that Robert Graysmith’s books are filled with falsehoods and his theory and suspect have no merit, the author’s defenders and others always search for something nice to say about the man and, unable to find a suitable response, they inevitably fall back on that familiar broken-record refrain, “Well, at least he kept the story alive.” This is a bit like saying: My friend told me he was hoping to meet a nice woman so I decided to brain him upside the head with a tire-iron in the hopes that he would go to the emergency room and possibly meet a nice nurse.

Anyone can “keep a story alive” using the self-serving and irresponsible methods of the theorists and crackpots, and it’s a bit absurd to suggest that the Zodiac case would fade into the pages of the history book if there weren’t a bunch of lunatics and losers running around exploiting the tragedy just in case we might all forget that this is the most enduring and frightening unsolved serial murder mystery in American history.

And there will be those who will say that the case is the most enduring and popular because of the efforts of these circus clowns, but anyone who really knows this story and has been paying attention also knows that this is an absurd rationalization. The reason that this case remains one of the most popular and interesting cases in history has more to do with the story itself than the clusters of opportunists who claim to keep it alive. The Zodiac crimes still haunt us because they were so inexplicable, so cruel, so bizarre. The countless lives lost and destroyed, the pain, the tragic proportions of the sad story are only the beginning. The fact that a murderous coward could kill so freely, even boast about his crimes and taunt his pursuers in bold letters mailed to the media, serves as a shocking and ominous truth about the world in which we live – the fact that this man could commit such crimes and evade justice to this day only reinforces that brutal lesson as we struggle to cope with and comprehend the evil among us. No one needs to accuse Kermit the Frog in order to keep the story of Jack the Ripper alive – the story speaks for itself. The story of the Zodiac tragedy endures not because it is a story about murder, but a story about us, and more often than not, when we look in the mirror, we don’t like what we see.

Hence the need for distractions. In an example of ultimate irony, many of those who claim to keep the story alive with their antics seem largely unaware that they – themselves – are the ultimate examples of a failure to learn that lesson. Forty years ago, when confronted with the terror of the Zodiac, society responded not by learning the valuable lessons provided by tragedy, not by uniting to stop the threat, and not by demanding justice, but by turning the tragedy into a distraction, so much filler, “real” entertainment. If the Zodiac’s game was creating terror and confusion while playing games with our fears and the truth, then it is clear that we, as a society, have simply learned to play his game better than he ever imagined, and that we no longer need him to keep the story alive.

While the men and women of law enforcement worked to catch the killer, the media, the public and, most notably, the theorists blamed investigators and accused them of fighting amongst themselves, withholding information, clinging to pet theories and suspects, and failing to conduct proper, thorough investigations. Today, the theorists withhold information from researchers, the public, and others, doling out seemingly damning bits while studiously omitting any and all information that may cast doubt on their own claims. Some withhold information and cite the need to keep something back in order to facilitate future “trading” with others. Innocent men stand accused by crackpots armed with little more than a three-ring binder filled with contrived coincidences and strained speculation. Many theorists claim to have solved the case, court the media, create websites and write books before they conduct serious research; most never conduct any real research at all. Wild theories, rumors, and pure nonsense dominate the public discussion of the case, and each theorist/theory/suspect develops its own following or faction at war with another. No matter how delusional, disturbed or discredited the theorists or accusers may be, someone will believe, promote, defend, endorse and even protect them. Everyone may be talking about and/or somehow exploiting the case but few seem to have any interest in facts, let alone clearing away confusion. Coddling crackpots who peddle phony proof, panhandling for cash on the Internet for Zodiac “charity,” promoting books, and pursuing fifteen seconds of fame at the expense of the case and even the truth has proven to be far more lucrative and entertaining.

When all we care about is “keeping the story alive,” we get what we deserve – Robert Graysmith and his works of fiction; ZODIAC the movie resurrecting the worst suspect in the case and, coincidentally, a sleep-deprived man tilts computer monitors and alerts the media of his Arthur Leigh Allen-based hallucinations; amateur code-breakers who are determined to retain their amateur status with hallucinatory solutions to the Zodiac ciphers which accuse Allen, Ted Kaczynski, Richard Marshall and even Gareth Penn, the original code-breaker crackpot of all time; Howard Davis and others crying conspiracy and cover-up as they attempt to exploit both the Zodiac and Manson crimes; Blaine Blaine digging up and re-accusing a dead man with the assistance of eager enablers in search of a quick buck; and Dennis Kaufman, Deborah Perez, Steve Hodel and others playing out their private daddy issues in public spectacles.

These individuals and others do not care about this story or the people consumed, destroyed or otherwise touched by this tragedy, and if you believe that they do, then you’re probably the kind of person who could – with a straight face and absolute sincerity – refer to a verbally abusive armed robber as a motivation speaker.

During the filming for the new History Channel program MYSTERYQUEST, I was given a unique opportunity to travel to the Zodiac crime scenes and interview the original investigators. Joining me on the expedition was criminalist Paul Holes, Chief Forensic Services Division for the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Department. Unfortunately, the final broadcast included very little of these discussions, and the viewers missed the chance to hear these men share their memories and opinions on the case. My last blog entry, titled PIERRE BIDOU & THE LAKE HERMAN ROAD MURDERS, included some of the insights provided by the retired investigator; today, I would like to share with you some of my experiences at the crime scene in San Francisco with Paul Holes.

On the night of October 11, 1969, cab driver Paul Stine was shot and killed at the intersection of Washington and Cherry in the upscale Presidio Heights neighborhood in San Francisco. The killer was seen by several witnesses as he handled Stine’s body inside the cab and then seen again minutes later by two police officers as he fled the scene. The descriptions provided by these witnesses led to a composite sketch, the now-infamous drawing of a suspect wearing glasses.

The killer’s behavior on that night has always puzzled me. Why did the killer linger at the scene for so long? Why did the killer – who usually had little-to-no contact with the victim after the attack – decided to handle the victim’s body and, as a result, become covered in Stine’s blood? Why did the killer act in a such a reckless fashion, touching Stine’s cab and leaving fingerprints? To me, this behavior seemed in conflict with the Zodiac’s character and usual methods.

After visiting the scene several times (the first in 1999), examining the police report, interviewing the first responding officer, and more, I pondered a theory regarding the events of that night. A picture began to emerge, a scenario which, I believe, makes more sense than any I’ve heard before or since.

According to Stine’s trip sheet, the man who entered his cab that night had directed the driver to the corner of Washington and Maple streets, one block east of the actual crime scene. For some reason, the cab was found one block further west, at Washington and Cherry. For years, this detail has made many observers question the killer’s motives and actions that night. As I studied this crime, I realized that the discrepancy regarding the destination might offer insight into what really happened. [I first presented this scenario in an audio-cast titled ZODIAC: A TO Z.]

In this scenario, the killer directed Paul Stine to Washington and Maple, where he planned to kill the driver upon arrival. However, as Stine slowed the cab to a stop at that corner, he did not put the cab in park, instead, letting the engine idle as he expected the passenger to pay the fare. He may have thought the transaction would be quick and he would simply pull away from the corner in a matter of seconds. However, the passenger then shot Stine in head, Stine’s foot slipped off the brake pedal, and the cab started to roll down the street, headed west toward Washington and Cherry. This was not part of the killer’s plan and he was forced to improvise.

As the cab rolled forward, the killer either jumped from the back seat into the front, or he exited the back seat by opening the door and then jumped into the front seat with Stine’s lifeless body. In order to reach the steering wheel and the pedals, the killer would have been forced to push Stine’s body toward the driver’s door into an upright position where he would remain as long as the killer struggled to regain control of the vehicle.

After the cab had rolled forward for a matter of seconds, the killer steered the vehicle to a stop at the next intersection and may have come to an abrupt stop. The witnesses in the upstairs floor of the house across the street told police that they never heard a gunshot, but something attracted their attention to the street below, where they quickly noticed the suspect inside the cab doing something with Stine’s body. Police were alerted, but the killer fled the scene before the first officer arrived. This officer, Armand Pelissetti, claims that he saw the so-called “bloody fingerprints” on the outside of cab as he first approached the scene. These prints were found in the exact location where the witnesses last saw the killer standing, making contact with the cab as he appeared to be “wiping” the outside of the vehicle.

Why did the Zodiac permit himself to be covered in Stine’s blood? Because he had to touch the body in order to stop the rolling cab. Why did the Zodiac linger at the scene? Perhaps because, once he had gotten blood all over himself, he wanted to wipe up the mess before exiting the cab – a man covered in blood would undoubtedly appear suspicious. So, he tore a portion of Stine’s shirt away to use as a rag. Once he wiped the blood from his hands and fingers, the killer realized that he may have touch other parts of the cab as he attempted to regain control of the vehicle. Perhaps, at the moment when Stine’s foot fell from the brake pedal and the cab began to roll, the Zodiac – who was sitting in the back seat – may have reached forward and grabbed onto parts of the cab for leverage. Therefore, he made an effort to obliterate whatever fingerprints he may have left but failed to wipe away all of the fingerprints, leaving several for police to later discover.

I believed that this scenario not only made sense but was in keeping with all of the known facts. I found it difficult to believe that the Zodiac intended to be covered in blood, intended to spend so much time at the scene, intended to behave in such a sloppy and reckless manner, or intended to take such risks. After I presented this theory in the audio-cast ZODIAC: A TO Z, I received emails from many people who also believed that this scenario made sense.

The last stop on the MYSTERYQUEST film shoot was San Francisco, and the Stine murder scene. As we waited for the producers and camera crew to finalize their plans for that segment, Paul Holes and I waited in a vehicle on Jackson Street, one block north of the crime scene at Washington and Cherry. In preparation for the shoot, I brought along my case files on each of the crimes, including the crime scene photographs. I decided to show these photos to Paul before the shoot in order to familiarize him with the details of the crime before we were asked to discuss the case on camera.

Paul examined the photos and, within minutes, his brow began to furrow with what appeared to be some concern about what he saw. I studied him carefully; he kept flipping the photos back and forth, staring at one, then another. He would focus on some portion of a photograph, and then asked me questions such as, “When was the body first moved? Who moved the body?” Clearly, something in the photographs stood out to him, and something didn’t seem right. As I watched him scrutinizing these photos, I could see why Paul was so good at his job; he had an eye for detail and a determination to learn as much as he could. He was also weary of forming an opinion too quickly, so even though I wanted to know what was on his mind, my experiences with him at the other crime scenes had taught me that he wouldn’t offer his opinion until he was satisfied he had given the issue proper consideration.

He pointed to the infamous photograph of Paul Stine’s lifeless body hanging half way out of the open passenger door of the taxi cab. Suddenly, he spoke: “It seems as if someone moved the body.”

I replied, “Yes, the body was moved shortly before this photograph was taken.”

He shook his head. “No, it looks like someone moved the body before that.” His finger tapped at the photo as he spoke. “The blood pattern on his shirt. It’s not consistent with his body lying on the seat of the cab as we see in these photos.”

I was obviously intrigued, and asked, “So you think the body was moved before the police moved it?”

Paul nodded. “Looks that way.” He focused on the large bloodstain on Stine’s shirt, clearly visible in the photograph. The dark stain covered the entire front portion of the shirt, and appeared to have flowed in a downward motion, away from the gunshot wound on the right rear side of Stine’s head. “This flow pattern is not what I’d expect to see if he was shot and then slumped over.”

We then discussed the eyewitness account of the killer’s movement inside the cab with Stine’s body. For Paul, the actions of the killer still did not account for the pattern on the shirt. “If he was shot sitting in an upright position and then left in that position, then this blood flow pattern makes sense. But if he was shot and then slumped over the suspect’s lap as described by the witnesses, this pattern is not consistent.”

Paul then stated that the photographs indicated that the killer had somehow handled Stine’s body in such a manner as to keep the victim propped up in the driver’s seat for an unknown period of time, long enough for the flow of blood to move down the front of Stine’s shirt and create the large visible stain.

When I heard Paul offer this explanation, my ears pricked up. I immediately realized that Stine’s body would be forced into such a position if the killer had jumped into the front seat next to him in order to regain control of the rolling cab. To do so, the killer would have to force Stine’s body to the left, against the door, in order to reach the steering wheel with his hands and reach the pedals with his feet. With the killer in this position, Stine’s body would be propped upright in the driver’s seat for a period time sufficient to direct the flow of blood downward and cause the large stain on Stine’s shirt. In short, Paul’s observations about the victim’s body and clothing confirmed a theory inspired by the seemingly inexplicable actions of the killer than night.

I cannot say with any certainty that this scenario is what happened that night, and I cannot speak for Paul when it comes to his opinions regarding this crime. At the very least, I wanted to share this intriguing possibility with those who may be interested. I am grateful that I had an opportunity to work with Paul Holes, and I valued the experience of discussing this case with a seasoned forensics expert. I learned a lot, and it is unfortunate that MYSTERYQUEST viewers won’t get a chance to hear Paul’s observations about the Zodiac crimes.

As Paul and I were discussing the possible scenarios at the Stine scene, one of the producers overheard us, was intrigued, and asked that we start the discussion from the beginning for the cameras. So, we repeated the exchange, this time with the cameraman leaning over our shoulders to shoot the photographs of the crime scene as Paul and I offered our thoughts. For me, this discussion was fascinating, and I’m sure that viewers would have found the exchange as fascinating as I did.

I have done my best to present Paul’s thoughts accurately, and I have avoided expanding on the dialogue I remember and the notes I took at the time. If Paul Holes would like to write up his own take on this issue, I welcome him to do so and would happily post anything he would like to offer.

I’d like to thank Paul for his contribution to the show. He did his best to bring his knowledge, experience and expertise to this case, and I’m sorry that viewers didn’t a get chance to see more of his contribution or hear his insights. This case needs more professionalism, common sense and candor, and Paul demonstrated all three of these qualities. I am grateful for the opportunity to work with him, but I am also glad I had a chance to learn from Paul.

The recent History Channel broadcast MYSTERYQUEST included footage taken during interviews with the original investigators at the actual crime scenes. Unfortunately, the program focused more on a theory and a suspect than the case itself and, therefore, viewers never heard these men tell their stories, share their memories, or offer their insights. Anyone who researches the Zodiac crimes would welcome the opportunity to tour the crime scenes with retired investigators Pierre Bidou, Ed Rust, and Ken Narlow, and the experience was, to say the least, unforgettable. Both Rust and Narlow have given many media interviews in the past, but Pierre Bidou has rarely spoken about what he witnessed on that dark night in December, 1968. Since viewers of MYSTERYQUEST missed this opportunity, I’d like to share a few highlights from our visit to the crime scene on Lake Herman Road.

Four decades ago, Bidou worked for the Benicia Police Department, and on the night of the murders, he and another officer were in a patrol car, on the road. “…we got the call from the dispatcher that an accident, or something, had occurred on Lake Herman Road, so we turned around and came by.”

At the scene, a Rambler station wagon sat parked on the side of the road, the passenger door open and the window rolled down. In the darkness, Bidou noticed the bodies of David Faraday and Betty Lou Jensen lying on the ground; Faraday was still breathing and clinging to life while Jensen had already died from the five gunshot wounds in her back. Faraday was taken to the hospital but did not survive the damage caused by one bullet fired into his skull. Shell casings found at the scene – and the number of wounds identified on the victims – indicated that the assailant had fired at least 10 shots; six entered the bodies of Faraday and Jensen, two were lodged in the Rambler station wagon, and two more had apparently disappeared into the cold night air.

The subsequent investigation failed to uncover any significant leads or evidence. Initially, investigators considered the possibility that the victims had been killed by someone who had known the victims and sought revenge for some perceived slight or wrong. One of Jensen’s high school boyfriends quickly became a suspect according to local gossip, but investigation proved that the boy had no access to a vehicle that night and most likely did not commit the crime. Authorities were forced to conclude that the two teenagers had been killed by a stranger in an apparently random act of inexplicable violence. Bidou stated that it would not be unusual to find young couples parked at the lovers’ lane spot. I asked, “If you were familiar with this area, would you expect to find couples out here at night?” Bidou answered, “Yes.”

David and Betty Lou had not planned to be on Lake Herman Road that night; in fact, they had promised Mr. and Mrs. Jensen that they would return home by 11:00 PM. However, a passing motorist saw the couple parked at the crime scene shortly after 11:00PM, and when another driver passed minutes later, another vehicle was parked along side Faraday’s Rambler station wagon. Despite the brief sighting of the killer’s vehicle, police were unable to produce any further information. “We never got a decent description of the vehicle,” Bidou explained.

Bidou offered his opinion on the theory that the killer chose the location or the victims at random. “I don’t believe personally that he was just passing by, and the kids were just here. I think, it was planned out, by him, for whatever sadistic reason, to some extent…”

Shortly before the murders on Lake Herman Road, Bidou had been involved in the investigation of marijuana distribution in the area; he recalled, “We even looked at the person who was involved.” I asked Bidou about the theory that David Faraday had been targeted by the pot dealer he allegedly confronted at a local restaurant. “There was nothing to it,” he replied. “Nothing came of it.”

When asked about other theories raised over the decades, Bidou endorsed none. He also dismissed the claim that authorities had obtained a credible confession from a suspect then in custody for another crime. The retired investigator laughed aloud at the notion that the notorious Manson family of killers were somehow behind the Zodiac crimes. “I don’t believe in that theory, either.”

The MYSTERYQUEST production was based in a Benicia hotel, located on the corner where witness Stella Borges had stopped to talk with local police on the night of December 20, 1968. Most of the interviews for the program were filmed in one of the hotel rooms, so a cast of Zodiac characters passed through the lobby at various times, including former police dispatcher Nancy Slover and retired detective Ed Rust of the Vallejo Police Department. As we chatted in the lobby, Rust expressed his doubts that the Zodiac was responsible for the murders on Lake Herman Road. When I asked him to explain the reasons for his doubts, Rust could only cite the fact that some of the investigators who had worked on that case did not believe that the Zodiac had committed the crime.

Prior to the interview at the Lake Herman Road crime scene with Bidou, criminalist Paul Holes also raised the possibility that the murders were not committed by the same individual responsible for the Zodiac crimes. Holes speculated that the Zodiac may have had access to a police teletype which contained the details of the Lake Herman Road crime. At the crime scene, Holes asked Bidou about the details provided in the teletype, and Bidou answered without hesitation, “It was sketchy.” He further explained that this was the result of a deliberate decision to keep certain details from the public so not to aid the killer by releasing information about their investigation and to avoid false confessions.

The notion that the Zodiac simply took credit for the crime has persisted for years, so I asked Bidou for his opinion on the issue. Could the details in the Zodiac’s letters come from a false confessor armed with information contained in news accounts or the police teletype? Bidou answered, “No, I don’t think so … there was too much detail.” After examining the case for decades, Bidou was convinced that the crimes were, in fact, connected. “I do believe the Zodiac was responsible.”

Like so many others, he admitted that he had no idea who the Zodiac was or what had happened to him. “Who knows if the Zodiac is alive today, or is incarcerated for something else, or if he just stopped killing.”

The passing years had not diminished Bidou’s hope that the killer would someday be identified. As I listened to him describe his memories from forty years ago, I could see in his eyes that need for answers. Like Rust and Narlow, Bidou carried the weight of the unsolved crimes on his face, in his shoulders, and in his voice. The notion that the murderer responsible for so much bloodshed, so much terror, and so much grief, was still walking among us greatly troubled the retired investigator. Bidou looked up at the clear blue sky and quietly sighed. “I want to see the case closed.”

I am grateful that I had the opportunity to meet with Pierre Bidou and listen as he shared his memories of that horrific night more than four decades ago. Like Bidou, I want to see the case closed. If there is any justice in this world or the next, the cowardly killer who claimed the lives of David Faraday, Betty Lou Jensen, and so many others, will someday be called to account for the carnage and sorrow he has created.

On Wednesday, September 30, 2009, more than forty years after the Zodiac killer first appeared, the new documentary series MYSTERYQUEST focused on the unsolved crimes.

The first episode of MYSTERYQUEST proved that the skull touted for years by the Russians as that of the notorious dictator Adolf Hitler was actually the skull of a woman. The second episode about the Bermuda Triangle was far-less revelatory, but, then again, did anyone expect otherwise? This more or less sums up my expectations regarding the third episode about the Zodiac crimes – it’s not as if the show is going to solve the case, and it’s not as if their efforts to use new technology to conduct DNA testing on the Zodiac letters and other examinations of other evidence is going to magically identify a suspect. I didn’t expect the MYSTERYQUEST investigation to uncover or present any damning new evidence to implicate Richard Gaikowski, Arthur Leigh Allen, Mr. X, or any other suspect – not that I wouldn’t welcome such evidence or the resolution to this case. Of course, I would happily accept any suspect as the Zodiac if it meant that the case would finally be solved.

The producers of MYSTERYQUEST worked diligently to obtain access to all of the available evidence in the various Zodiac cases. Those who have followed the case have had many questions for many years: Do any of the suspected fingerprints actually belong to the killer and, if so, are they of sufficient quality to accurately identify a suspect? Is the partial DNA profile previously obtained from Zodiac letters and envelopes reliable scientific evidence? Can this partial profile be completed using new technology? Can the DNA taken from one Zodiac letter be matched to DNA taken from another letter? What other evidence exists, and have authorities taken the necessary steps to process that evidence and share information? Unfortunately, MYSTERYQUEST did not answer any of these questions; the most significant new “evidence” presented was an age progressed sketch of the Stine suspect composite sketch.

As many of you had guessed, there is no audiotape of the Zodiac killer’s voice, despite the wording of the show summary on the MYSTERYQUEST website. Apparently, the individual who wrote the summary was in error, as the show did not feature any audiotape of the Zodiac’s voice.

The program gives the impression that Nancy Slover listened to the tape of Gaikowski’s voice for the first time; in fact, she heard the tape some time ago and has already stated that Gaikowski’s voice was similar to that of the Zodiac (she allegedly “identified” Gaikwoski as the man she spoke with more than forty years ago).

During the broadcast, Nancy was asked to listen to tapes of Gaikowski’s voice again and offered her opinion. “That came very close to his ‘Good-bye,’ to me,” Nancy said of one portion of the tape. “It’s the same guy.” When asked if she was certain, she replied, “I am.” Slover added, “In my opinion, that is the man that called VPD in the early morning hours of July 5, 1969. I just know what my gut feeling is, and my reaction is.”

While some may choose to embrace Slover’s “identification,” it seems clear that such an identification cannot be considered reliable, despite the contradictory opinion allegedly expressed by Slover’s neurologist. More that forty years have passed since Slover spoke with the killer for a matter of seconds; at best, one could hope that Slover would be able to say that a voice was similar or dissimilar, but to refer to such an identification as “positive” is to ignore the obvious fact that no one could accurately identify a voice after so many decades have passed.

Unlike those who are clinging to bad theories and suspects, I see no legitimate reason to believe that the DNA evidence previously obtained by the SFPD crime lab is somehow flawed, contaminated or otherwise unreliable. If it was up to me, the DNA would match any one of the known suspects and we could all say “Case Closed.” Yet, no matter how sound the DNA evidence may be, I’m sure some theorist will come forward with a long-list of 75 retired mailmen who are willing to swear under oath that they used to walk around San Francisco licking envelopes as they made their rounds in 1969. While MYSTERYQUEST did not present any new DNA evidence, new technology may someday unlock whatever secrets the Zodiac’s envelopes may posses. According to the program, the San Francisco Police Department refused to cooperate with the efforts of MYSTERYQUEST to compare the recently obtained suspected-Gaikowksi DNA with the partial DNA profile reportedly obtained from a Zodiac envelope in 2002.

The production offered a unique experience; we visited each crime scene, and interviewed three of the original investigators – Pierre Bidou (Benecia PD), Ed Rust (VPD), and Ken Narlow (NCSO). As we traveled to the crime scene and spoke with the men who had stood on that same ground forty years to see the carnage created by this killer, as we heard their memories, studied the crime scene photos and original reports, and discussed the facts, the story of the Zodiac was more real, more terrifying than ever before. I was reminded of a scene from the television mini-series The DELIBERATE STRANGER, in which several detectives and a reporter talk about the painful price they have all paid in their pursuit of serial killer Ted Bundy.

Near the end of the film, Det. Bob Keppel (Frederic Forrest) likens Bundy’s effect on the world to that of a pebble in a pond and the many people swept into the tragedy to the ripples created by its sudden impact on a previously-peaceful surface. Keppel notes that the cost was irrelevant, and that if he played even a small part in stopping the killing, then his contribution would probably be the single most important thing he had ever done in his life. Those who are familiar with and have studied Keppel’s career know that his contribution far exceeds his uncanny ability to remain humble and still be one of the most insightful minds in the study of serial crime.

I cannot claim to have served society or contributed to the greater understanding of serial crime as Narlow, Rust, Bidou, Keppel and others have, nor can I claim to possess any special skill or indispensable insights into the human condition. At best, I’d like to believe that I have made some small contribution to this world, and this case, in my efforts to learn as much as I can about this unsolved mystery and share that information with those who care. Over the years, I have been reminded of the responsibility that comes with publicly “entering” this story, and the fact that – no matter how entertaining this murder mystery may be for some – this tragedy is all too real, and the people destroyed or traumatized by the ongoing injustice and exploitation deserve a lot better than the never-ending circus of the Zodiac saga. My unforgettable conversations with those involved in the story still haunt me; Dean Ferrin, husband of Zodiac victim Darlene Ferrin, Sue Ayers, Dean’s cousin, Darlene’s sister Pam, police dispatcher Nancy Slover, detectives Ed Rust, Pierre Bidou, Ken Narlow, DOJ Agents Mel Nicolai and Fred Shirasago, survivor Bryan Hartnell, SFPD Inspectors Kelly Carroll, Tom Bruton, Vince Repetto, suspects Michael O’Hare, Mr. X, the family of suspect Arthur Leigh Allen, and many more. These people have lived the story – the rest of us are simply moving in the margins.

The seemingly-limitless supply of circus clowns proves that there will always be those who respectfully walk around a grave, and those who see that same sacred ground as an appropriate place for a dance party. The exploitation of the Zodiac case has become a cottage industry and a full-time career for many snake-oil salesmen. Like starved and impatient patrons in a fast-food drive-thru, crime buffs can choose from a large menu of cheap and preservative-filled suspects sold by the likes of Howard Davis, Blaine Blaine, Robert Graysmith, Dennis Kaufman, Deborah Perez, and so many others. Now author Steve Hodell has joined the chorus of children accusing dead fathers; his book MOST EVIL: Avenger, Zodiac, and the Further Crimes of Dr. George Hodel will be met with praise from “respected” true-crime writers and more who are happy to promote yet another shameless and irresponsible stunt on the Zodiac stage. Each new crackpot, theory and suspect creates more confusion and inspires more crackpots with more theories and suspects. The story of the Zodiac often seem lost somewhere in the fog surrounding these fools, funny fellows, comic men and clowns of private life.

Unfortunately, MYSTERYQUEST sqaundered its opportunity to provide information and clear confusion. Instead of using the hours of material shot at the crime scenes, in which the original investigators revealed important details and debunked many myths, the program devoted an inordinate amount of time to the crackpot Blaine Blaine and his enablers; in fact, the show was little more than a protracted commercial for Blaine’s accusations. Frankly, I am disappointed; once again, valuable time was wasted on nonsense rather than focusing on important issues. In short, MYSTERYQUEST was a wasted opportunity.

Yet, there were some highlights for me. During the filming of the program I was privileged to work with criminalist Paul Holes, Chief Forensic Services Division of the Contra Costa Sheriff’s Department. The producers made the right choice when they asked criminalist Paul Holes to examine the evidence in this case. Paul’s work in the unsolved EAR/ONS [East Area Rapist and Original Night Stalker] case may someday help to convict a suspect. Paul approached the evidence in this case with the skepticism and pragmatism of a true professional, and my discussions with him forced me to re-examine some of the opinions regarding the evidence we have all heard about for so many years. My conversations with Paul left me convinced that he would follow the evidence wherever it led and that he took great pride in precision, professionalism and the process itself. As I listened to Paul discuss his past cases, his victories and the unsolved cases, I realized that, as much as I would never possess his skill, expertise and experience, I knew that we both shared one simple personality trait: we hated mysteries. Whenever I say that people look at me with a puzzled expression as if such a statement was somehow in direct conflict with my work on this case. Quite the contrary; I am attracted to unsolved crimes because they are questions in need of answers, and knowledge makes the difference. I’m sure I speak for Paul when I say that he has no interest in walking away from any case without those answers, and neither do I.

Yet answers have always proven to be elusive in the Zodiac case, and while MYSTERYQUEST may have provided some useful information, we are not “one step closer to solving the mystery.” Like so many who have followed this case, I still have hope that this mystery can be solved. As much as I cling to that hope, I often feel as if entering the Zodiac story is a bit like entering hell, where a sign reportedly reads, “Abandon hope all ye who enter here.”