Read on Twitter
The Zodiac Murders were Faked
As you may know, the Zodiac killer was an alleged serial killer starting in late 1968 in San Francisco. He taunted the police and newspapers with cryptograms like this one:
As you may know, the Zodiac killer was an alleged serial killer starting in late 1968 in San Francisco. He taunted the police and newspapers with cryptograms like this one:
The 408-character cryptogram was broken on August 8, 1969. Before I show you the message, I beg you to notice the date. That is the day before the alleged Tate murders.
OK, here is the message:
OK, here is the message:
They tell us the meaning of the final 18 letters has not been decoded to this day. Which is somewhat curious in that it took me only about 30 minutes to crack it. But before I do that, notice we have more numerology here.
There are 18 letters at the end, code cracked on 8/8, 408 total. There are 9 letters missing, which can be filled in from following the easy clues. That means there are 390 letters in the main text, plus 18, plus 9. Beyond that, the codes were received by the newspapers on 8/1.
None of that is really important, but it tells us who we are dealing with. The funny thing about the Zodiac event is that all the numerology and astrology involved shouldn't be telling you we are dealing with a new-age killer, it should tell you we are dealing with Intelligence.
But back to the message. It is obvious the main text is garbage. It is only there to cover the real message. The real message is in the final 18 letters. But to decode the final 18, you have to follow the clues in the main text.
It was noticed from the beginning that the Zodiac appeared to be a terrible speller, but no one followed up on that clue. Or, they actually misdirected on it, telling us things like “the Zodiac purposely injects errors into his messages to throw off police.”
But his misspellings here don't look like accidental misspellings, do they? No one misspells “dangerous” with an “e” at the end or spells “stop” with an “a” at the beginning.
So we can be sure the misspellings are done on purpose. They aren't done to throw off police, they are part of the cipher. All we have to do is go in and make the corrections.
There are 9 corrections and they give us the letters RSITSMWSN. So we get the string RSITSMWSNEBEORIETEMETHHPITI. Those 27 letters are just a long anagram resulting in two possible messages:
1. SETH, MEET ROB SMITH NWEST PIER II
2. STEPHENS, MEET ROBERT SMITH WIII
1. SETH, MEET ROB SMITH NWEST PIER II
2. STEPHENS, MEET ROBERT SMITH WIII
I doubt that this code hasn't been broken before. More likely is that it has been broken many times, but the solution just isn't published at places like Wikipedia, for obvious reasons.
So who is Rob Smith? That is Robert Graysmith, whose real name was originally Robert Gray Smith. See how little he had to change to fool you? He legally changed his name in 1976, seven years after 1969. That by itself is a red flag.
If you go to the Wikipedia page on the Zodiac killer, you will find that almost a third of the footnotes link to Robert Graysmith.
This is because Gray Smith wrote two of the most influential books on the Zodiac killer, called Zodiac (1986—but written ten years earlier) and Zodiac Unmasked: The Identity of America's Most Elusive Serial Killer (2002). He is like the Vincent Bugliosi of the Zodiac murders.
Notice that Smith changed his name in 1976, and wrote his book in 1976. Coincidence? Nope.
Many have been suspicious of Smith from the beginning, since he just happened to be working at the San Francisco Chronicle when the alleged Zodiac killer was mailing in his notes.
Many have been suspicious of Smith from the beginning, since he just happened to be working at the San Francisco Chronicle when the alleged Zodiac killer was mailing in his notes.
Smith was working as a cartoonist in 1969 at the Chronicle, and was in several of the meetings where the cryptograms were discussed. Why would a cartoonist be present for something like that?
Also suspicious is the rest of his oeuvre, which includes a 1997 book on the Unabomber, a 1999 book on Jack the Ripper, and a 2003 book on the Anthrax killer. Knowing what we now know, we should ask if Smith is being paid to misdirect his readership on all these cases.
It looks to me like his superiors were happy with his work on the first Zodiac book and hired him to create the same sort of mystification on these other cases.
If you don't know, the London papers admitted in 2013 that Jack the Ripper was manufactured by Thomas Bulling in 1888, a journalist who worked for the Central News Agency. He was paid to supply crime stories to the newspapers. https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/431148/Jack-the-Ripper-mystery-solved-by-top-detective-after-125-years
The Central News Agency was sort of like our Associated Press, except that, according to Paul Begg, “it developed a reputation amongst newsmen for underhand practices and stories of dubious veracity." No, wait, that is exactly like our Associated Press.
So we have yet another reason to look suspiciously at the Unabomber case and the Anthrax killer case. If Graysmith is misdirecting on two of the four, he is misdirecting on all of them.
Many will know that Smith's fingering of Arthur Leigh Allen has not impressed any of the other serious researchers. His evidence is slender, weak, and pushed, and it has been discredited by police and FBI alike, including a failure to match DNA
http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/graysmith2.htm
http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/graysmith2.htm
Despite that, he has mysteriously benefited from the most promotion. His book was the inspiration for the 2007 movie Zodiac, starring Jake Gyllenhaal as Smith.
The movie was directed by David Fincher, which is also a clue here. Fincher also directed the Social Network in 2010, which promoted Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg. Facebook is of course a DARPA creation, used for direct and easy intel gathering.
Fincher directed Fight Club, which was also an Intel production. Fincher has directed two episodes of House of Cards, which is political propaganda of the most transparent sort, making The West Wing look relatively subtle in comparison.
Fincher directed The Game (1997), which was produced by Propaganda Films. No, really—Propaganda Films. It is about an investment banker who gets involved in a completely faked world. Sound familiar?
What is Fincher's next movie about? It is called Gone Girl, and we know the plot from the book. It is about a wife who fakes her diary and death to implicate her husband. And no, she doesn't get caught.
Finding her death too hard to fake, she returns to her husband, telling him she had been kidnapped. He doesn't believe her, but he takes her back. The book ends with the wife writing a memoir about her fake abduction. So, as in The Game, we have a fake inside a fake.
Do you see a pattern here, not only with Fincher but with Gray Smith?
Gray Smith has acted so spooky in so many ways over the years that some have even theorized that he is the Zodiac himself, covering his tracks with the lies and distortions in his books. But although I understand how someone could come to that conclusion, it is not the truth here
The truth is, the Zodiac murders were faked from the first day, with the collusion of all the top people in San Francisco. I leave open the possibility that some in the story were ignorant dupes, fooled by the people around them, but unwinding who was who is not so easy.
The closest I have seen anyone coming to this conclusion is Thomas Horan, who says the Zodiac letters were all faked by Keith Power and Hal Snook. He makes some interesting points, and he is correct that the letters were faked.
http://zodiachoax.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00-06:00&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00-06:00&max-results=5
http://zodiachoax.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00-06:00&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00-06:00&max-results=5
But he is either wrong or misdirecting about why and on the orders of whom. Horan leads you to the theory that the Zodiac was faked to keep the heat off the real killers, who were connected to the Vallejo PD.
This takes us into the drug story, which includes the theory that Faraday and Ferrin and others were involved in the drug trade there. I will show all that is a diversion as well, on a par with the Satanism diversion in the Tate/Manson event.
You see, they have to have fake stories planted for everyone, including those who get pretty far into the investigation. Some will get waist- deep like we have already, realize the letters were fake and that a lot of other stuff is fishy, and begin to balk.
This drug story if for those people. Those like Horan who tell it admit all the lies you have already discovered, but then they divert you into another set of lies. They want you to think the local police might be involved, since that still keeps your eyes off the bigger dogs
Ask yourself this: if the Vallejo police were dirty and were trying to cover their tracks with the Zodiac story, how did they have the power or reach to plant stories not only in the San Francisco Chronicle and the newswire, but in the detective mags as well?
They would have had to begin planting stories even before the Faraday/Jensen murders. The Vallejo PD simply didn't have that reach. They would have to have been connected to Feds, and were.
By 1968, all police departments, like all city newspapers, had been swallowed by the Intelligence squid. The CIA has since admitted that about the media (see the Senate Church hearings), but it was just as true of local police.
They could and did plant agents wherever they wished, and most PD's were happy to give them access. Those PD's that weren't happy were ordered to get happy about it, which they did.
Who is Seth? Seth Morgan was the fiancé of Janis Joplin in 1970, at the time she allegedly died. Morgan is normally sold to the world as a drug dealer and sometimes student at UC Berkeley, but he was always much more than that.
To start with, he was the son of George Frederick Morgan, founder of the Hudson Review. The Hudson Review was founded in 1947, year one of the CIA, which should get you on the right track here. George Morgan studied at Princeton under Allen Tate, and was one of his main protegés.
Tate was one of the ones who voted the first Bollingen Prize to agent Ezra Pound in 1948. Tate was published by Encounter magazine, which was created and funded by the CIA.
He was also in cohoots with Paul Mellon and Stephen Spender. For more on this, Frances Stoner Saunders' book The Cultural Cold War: the CIA and the World of Arts and Letters. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html
The Hudson Review, like Encounter, Partisan Review, Paris Review, and all the other literary magazines, was a CIA front. Given the bio of Seth Morgan, we should assume he was continuing in his father's footsteps.
We get all the same markers if we study the bio of Janis Joplin. Joplin's career also rose out of Haight- Ashbury in the mid-1960's, where the CIA and FBI had a large presence.
Janis ran with the connected crowd: the children of the wealthy and influential whose parents always seem to be in military, Intelligence, or financial sector. Before she got with Morgan, she is said to have been sleeping with Kris Kristofferson, whose father was a major general.
Kris was also a Rhodes Scholar who attended Oxford. He was also a captain in the army himself. Not your expected bio for a Haight- Ashbury hippie and musician, eh?
As we know, Joplin hung out with and played with the Grateful Dead. Jerry Garcia had also been in the military, although we are told he was discharged. I don't tend to believe that. He was only given an unusual assignment.
Garcia went into the military in 1960, was supposedly discharged same year, then a few months later in 1961 he hooked up with Robert Hunter, who has red flags all over him. Hunter is known as a lyricist, and his best-known song may be “Friend of the Devil.”
Hunter ended up collaborating with both Jerry Garcia and Bob Dylan, but less known is that Hunter was an early volunteer at the CIA MKULTRA psychedelic tests at Stanford in 1962. This puts him with Gordon Lish, Ken Kesey, and many others.
They say these guys were volunteers, but they look like recruits. Kesey ended up pushing these drugs on the hippies over the next decade, via suspicious programs like the Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test. So did Hunter and the Grateful Dead. So did Joplin and Kris and all the rest.
Speaking of Kris, we are supposed to believe Kristofferson slept with Joplin? This goes against the rest of the story in many ways, as well as against reason and human nature. Joplin herself tells us she was voted “ugliest man” in her highschool class.
When she was supposed to be with Kris she was already
26, and no longer looking her best. That's Janis at 25. She didn't have a lot of heterosexual male groupies. This is a problem because Kris was handsome. He had to be, since he couldn't sing and couldn't act.
26, and no longer looking her best. That's Janis at 25. She didn't have a lot of heterosexual male groupies. This is a problem because Kris was handsome. He had to be, since he couldn't sing and couldn't act.
See him in Semi-Tough, with Burt Reynolds. Although he had none of the charm of Reynolds, he was always much better looking. Assuming Kris was hetero, there would be no reason for him to hook up with Joplin.
As a connected and very handsome young man, he would have his pick of the 10's, so why would he be sleeping with a five? I have no doubt he was hanging out with Joplin, but I assume he was her handler or her brains, not her lover.
Besides which, we know Joplin was gay herself, no matter what Kris was. She was with Peggy Caserta at the time. Which means both her relationships with Kris and Seth Morgan are not what we are told.
Joplin's producer was Paul Rothchild, who was also the producer for The Doors. As we now know, Jim Morrison's dad was the Navy Admiral at the infamous Gulf of Tonkin incident, a false flag used to escalate the Vietnam War.
Also take note of the name Rothchild. They will deny he is related to the Rothschild bankers, but all the Rothschilds, by whatever spelling, are related to the Rothschild bankers. How do I know? Because the Rothschild name was made up by the bankers, and didn't exist until then.
It means “red shield”, and was chosen by the Jewish bankers in Germany for several reasons, only one of which was to make them seem more German.
It is like if you renamed your family Bobafett, because you thought of yourselves as great bounty hunters. Since no one else has a last name of Bobafett, we can be sure that any Bobafetts in the future will be related to you.
So hopefully you begin to understand who and what Seth Morgan was. He may have been a drug dealer, but all these people were drug pushers one way or another.
The drug market in the San Francisco area at the time wasn't run by low-life criminals, dirty cops, or the Mafia. It was run by the Feds. It still is, in every city and town in the world.
The Feds may use local losers for the lowest rung of jobs, but the market is controlled from the top, and the top goes all the way up. That is why you always find the sons and daughters of the elite—like Seth Morgan—if you take the time to dig.
They weren't fallen scions, “angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection”; they were planted agents, the youthcorp of Intelligence. We saw this over and over in the Tate/Manson hoax, and we will see it again here.
But back to Morgan. The Joplin event was just a year after the Zodiac event, so Morgan would have been about 20 then. Curiously, even here we have a mystery, since the reports don't match.
According to Wikipedia, Morgan was 21 in 1970, when he was with Joplin. But according to litreactor, Morgan was admitted to Berkeley in 1967 with sophomore status. https://litreactor.com/columns/neglected-authors-seth-morgan
He should have been 18 in 1967, so he appears to be a year or two ahead of his schoolmates. That is a problem because we are also told he was expelled from several ritzy east-coast private schools, and “lost a few years” due to his hell-raising ways. It can't be both ways.
Although Morgan's biography has been whitewashed, overwritten, and manufactured, it is clear his assignment was much the same as Gray Smith's: keep retelling the old stories to keep them fresh.
In his book Homeboy, Morgan retold the old manufactured stories from the late 60's, including the stories of Joplin, Morrison, the Grateful Dead, and so on. The same way, Gray Smith retold all the lies concerning the Zodiac killer, keeping them up-to-date for the new generations.
Since their later assignments were similar, we should not be surprised to find such similarity in their early assignments, and should not be surprised to find them mentioned together in this cryptogram message.
They were both young writers in their 20's, placed in this event as possible future story tellers, but mainly as low-level errand boys and messengers getting their feet wet in Intelligence. It is clear from the message that they were (at first) being used as the CIA's pigeons.
The logical thing to do once we see that is to compare Smith's childhood and genealogy to Morgan's. But you can't. His early life has been scrubbed. All his bios start with his time at the SF Chronicle, when he was already 27.
We aren't told who his parents were or where he went to university or what he did before 1969. With a lot of digging,
I finally found one short bio that stated his father was a Lt. Colonel in the Air Force, stationed in Pensacola. That tends to confirm my analysis above, and matches what we will find below. A disproportionate number of Lt. Colonels in these events/hoaxes.
Who is STEPHENS? In my opinion, that would be HUGH STEPHENS, another writer like Gray Smith and Paul Avery. While Avery was telling the story at the Chronicle, Stephens was telling it at the Front Page Detective. They had to sell the story both highbrow and lowbrow, you know.
Hugh Stephens posted both those first two cover stories. Stephens and Smith may have been meeting to be sure Stephens was on the same page of the script as Avery. Being out of the loop, it was easy for Stephens to get lost.
This did in fact happen at least one time in late 1969, when Stephens reprinted something straight from the Chronicle that the Chronicle had since updated. The Front Page Detective published with a delay, since the mainstream press didn't wish to compete with them.
Stephens was just retelling stories from the big papers. This could cause problems and sometimes did, as when the Chronicle was pushing the manufactured story about pieces of Paul Stine's shirt. As Thomas Horan showed that ended up creating an important continuity problem.
To avoid more of those, meetings were set up with Stephens, to keep him in the loop. It seems like they could have just called or written, but it is possible someone high up at the Chronicle was not in on the game and was getting suspicious.
But Intelligence loves this cloak and dagger bullshit, anyway, and often seems to resort to it just for fun. It gives them a chance to get out of the office.
We see evidence these detective mags were controlled by the same people controlling the Zodiac event
if we look at the timeline of stories. You can visit this online magazine rack, which shows when stories were printed by the various cheapsheets.
http://www.zodiackiller.com/ZMagazineRack.html
if we look at the timeline of stories. You can visit this online magazine rack, which shows when stories were printed by the various cheapsheets.
http://www.zodiackiller.com/ZMagazineRack.html
The thing you should notice in this regard is the first in the series, a November 10, 1968 dated article in the January 1969 Inside Detective written by John Montgomery. It is about the Cheri Jo Bates murder from two years earlier.
Why would Montgomery be publishing a story more than two years after the fact? Well, notice the date. He is preparing his audience for the Faraday/Jensen murders of December 20, 1968. His byline is dated five weeks before that.
In fact, by the time the magazine hits the stands, the Faraday/Jensen murders will have already happened. Montgomery can then claim to be prescient, or at least incredibly timely. But he wasn't just lucky in his timing. It looks like it was all planned.
They knew they were going to try to link the Bates murder to the Zodiac even before the Faraday/Jensen murders. That is precisely what Montgomery's article does. It plants the seed for the link in your head, even before the second murders have happened.
This takes us back to the Vallejo police. If the Vallejo police were doing a cover-up of their own drug trade, how did they get to Montgomery in November of 1968, before there was even anything to cover up?
Interesting that Montgomery's main bullet is “Keep your sisters, daughters, and wives off the streets and out of the alleys. I will murder again and again. . .” They are driving that point home, since it is the main line of the psy-op. They want to scare everyone straight.
They want the ladies to go to the malls to buy things, sure, but they want them to go straight home, looking at no one, and shivering in their pumps. Also curious is how similar this quote looks to Islamic sharia code, where women are kept off the streets “for their own good.”
You will say that conflicts with the whole empowerment of women code we have also seen pushed since the 1960's. Yes, but the conflict is also purposeful.
At the same time they are empowering women, they are scaring them senseless with mass murders and serial killers and a thousand other things. Of course this sets up an internal tension that women have to deal with, and most of the deal with it by having a series of breakdowns.
Some of them have a few big breakdowns, and some have little breakdowns every week or every day. This causes them to buy a raft of things they don't need, from junkfood to unnecessary clothing to medical and psychological care to new age treatments to drugs.
Of course this also applies to men, but men mostly breakdown from having to deal with these women.
We get confirmation that the events succeeded in creating great fear, since after the Bates murder it was reported that “50 students had dropped out of night classes following the discovery of the brutal murder. Many of the coeds were forbidden from going on campus at night.”
But, people being what they are, this fear doesn't seem to last long. The governors found that they have had to accelerate the events, and make them progressively more gruesome, in order to maintain the fear. Somehow, women just keep going out and traveling alone.
So let's return for a moment to the decoded message. Does the decoding of PIER 2 fit the scenario? Yes, since the San Francisco Chronicle was only about six long blocks away from that pier. If you take Mission street from 5th straight down to the ocean, you hit piers 1 and 2.
There are currently a lot of shops there, including a Sinbad's restaurant, but they weren't there in 1969. Back then it was an actual pier, more like what pier 7 still is.
Of course this applies just as well to pier 3, which is right next to pier 2. WIII would then signify “west pier 3” in that case, I assume, or perhaps “wharf (dock) 3”.
We know that the government was running a lot of programs in the area, and we know what those programs were. So if we see a media report that mirrors a government program, we have to ask if the two are the same.
The Zodiac murders look like the government programs of the time, and look very much like the faked Manson murders, so we should be very suspicious.
Since the Manson murders were faked, and since they included many of the same folks, and the same types of folks, we should look very hard for evidence the Zodiac murders were faked.
The involvement of Gray Smith and Morgan fits that storyline far better than it fits a storyline where one or both of them were murderers, or involved with real murderers. Given their known backgrounds and connections, it is much more likely they were government operatives.
We know these government operatives were faking murders, so it is extremely likely the Zodiac murders were faked as well. And since Manson's time in Vacaville was faked, Morgan's probably was, too.
We get more indication operatives in San Francisco were faking the Zodiac story, since the letters— supposed written from NAPA—were posted in downtown SF. Most likely, the letters were posted to the SF Chronicle from the SF Chronicle, or from offices nearby.
If the Chronicle writers weren't writing the letters in-house, so to speak, then they would have to come from one of the many spook houses in the near vicinity. Not only were (and are) the nearby Stanford and Berkeley campuses stiff with spook labs, SF proper is as well.
Remember, Paul Tate, the overseer of the entire Tate/Manson event, was tied to San Francisco and Haight-Ashbury in 1968-9. He was placed there by many writers, including Ed Sanders (who wrote the second most famous book on the event after Buglioi's Helter Skelter).
For instance, the Tates, the Folgers, and the Manson girls were all in San Francisco for a benefit for the Haight-Ashbury Clinic of Roger Smith and David Smith in 1968. Notice those names. Smith, Smith. Are these guys related to Gray Smith? Smith is a common name, but who knows.
Robert Gray Smith named one of his sons David. Yes, his son is David Smith, the same as Charles Manson's parole officer. I am not saying it is the same guy, since the ages are way off; I am just pointing out it is possible Robert named his son for David.
This clinic was one of the spookiest places in the entire country, but not because the Manson girls were there. It was spooky because it was one of the national centers for drug pushing in the 1960's.
We may assume it was also connected to those who were infiltrating and pushing the anti-war and hippie movements in prescribed directions, including the Aquarian direction.
This is why the pushed drugs like LSD connect to the Zodiac event: the same people that were pushing the hippies into new lab drugs were also pushing the hippies into the Aquarian/Zodiac/Astrology program of self-absorption and political inaction.
In this way, the Zodiac killer served double duty. He scared everyone into a general panic—a panic that could then be mined in any number of ways. But he also blackwashed the hippies, since they too were into the Zodiac.
After August 9, 1969, most people in San Francisco just figured “those damned hippies were at it again” whenever they thought of the Zodiac.
So the Zodiac event was a sort of mop-up after the Manson event. Any remaining positive hippie influence in Northern California could be finished off by the Zodiac.
Checking Wikipedia, we find that the first confirmed Zodiac victims in the Bay Area were said to be found by a local female resident after 11pm. This resident lived near a lovers lane, where the young couple were parked.
Now, ask yourself this: If you were a lone female living near a lovers lane and you heard shots and screams coming from parked cars nearby, would you go out there in the dark and look for bodies immediately afterwards? Not a chance. You would call the police.
In normal circumstances, people killed like this would not be found until the next morning, especially by local residents. Remember, lovers lanes are not normally found right on residential streets. They are found on deserted streets for quite obvious reasons.
That being admitted, it is very curious to hear that bodies were found after 11pm by a female resident. You also have to remember that this was winter, it was very cold, and this lady lived on a farm or ranch.
Rancher's wives aren't normally driving around after 11pm in the middle of winter. Ranchers and their families generally go to bed early.
It is also curious that the Wikipedia entry admits that the story has been compiled from forensic evidence by Robert Graysmith. Normally, the forensic evidence would have been compiled by a forensic specialist working for the local or federal agencies, not by a cartoonist.
Given all the money that was said to have been spent working on these cases for decades, it must be extraordinary to see the mainstream story 45 years later told by Graysmith.
If you think that was strange, check out the story of the second murders:
If you think that was strange, check out the story of the second murders:
OK, imagine you are the Zodiac. You have a flashlight and a 9mm Luger (or similar pistol). Your victims are trapped in a car, where they cannot get away and can barely move sideways, both being in the front seat. Talk about shooting fish in a barrel.
You hit the nearest one three times, the bullets traveling with such velocity they go right through and hit the other person as well. You come back and shoot the near guy twice more, and this time he can move even less, since he has already been stopped by three bulletholes.
And remember, you have a flashlight, so you can see exactly where you are shooting. A 9mm is nearer a .38 than a .22 (being .354), so it is quite powerful. It also imparts a fast bullet speed (high muzzle velocity). Is there any chance that near guy is going to survive? No.
Here is the guy, Michael Mageau, in 1993: Looks pretty good, doesn't he? I don't see any face or neck scars, do you? No one asked him to show his scars? Curious. Also curious is that Mageau testified at different times that the Zodiac was both160 lbs and 190 lbs.
Also curious is that he later ID'ed Arthur Leigh Allen as the Zodiac, so he was obviously instructed to follow the script of Graysmith. This indicates he was just a hired crisis actor from the beginning.
Also of interest is that Darlene Ferrin, who supposedly died in that attack, has a younger sister. The younger sister Christina has said in interviews that Mageau was always a big liar, even before the Zodiac attacks.
True, but you know who else is probably a big liar? Christina Ferrin, who is hiding that fact that her sister's death was faked. Christina may even be Darlene. Remember how Sharon Tate hid as her fake younger sister?
Why else would Christina still be calling Michael a liar decades later? The heat in her interviews is best explained by their earlier relationship.
I tried to find some crime scene photos to analyze. But I found nothing that was even remotely analyzable, in a normal way. What we get is something like this, which is supposed to be Cheri Jo Bates.
As we see, there are at least two photographers there, one in the picture and one taking it. Neither of those two guys could get anything better than this? They are supposed to be photographing the victim, not eachother. That photo looks fake to me.
The body doesn't look right around the edges. Study her hip to your right. The line around it isn't right. She is also too flat to the background. Her body doesn't have enough elevation. The lower leg looks two-dimensional, and the upper leg looks broken in two places.
I am not aware her legs were supposed to have been broken. Her upper leg looks to be broken above the knee and at the ankle. She doesn't have any arms, either. They could be pinned beneath her, but it is convenient that the photo faker didn't have to put them in.
If he made such a mess of the legs, just think how bad the nearer arms would look. Best to skip them. Same with the head. Convenient we can't see her face. That prevents identification. This photo is worthless except as propaganda, which is why it is still on the internet.
We see another problem with the dark sweater she appears to be wearing. The problem: she wasn't reported to be wearing one. According to the report, she was wearing a yellow blouse with a ribbon tied at the throat. Is that what you see in that photo?
I will be told that entire dark area is blood. She was stabbed in the throat repeatedly. Still, is that how it looks to you?
Would both shoulders and all visible parts of her arms be turned near-black? If so, why would the soaking end in a straight line across her back, as if she is wearing a dark sweater that has ridden up?
Now that I know this photo was faked, I would say the faker decided this was the best way to deal with the problem area. He needed to indicate some blood around her neck, so he probably put in a limited amount to start with. It didn't look right, so he put in more.
It still looked fake, so he put in even more, until it looked like she was wearing a sweater. At that point he quit, because although it now didn't look like blood, at least it looked like something real, enough to fool most people.
Even the men in the picture look pasted in. That cameraman is outside, why does he need a flash? Look at his hand with the white card. It doesn't look right, does it? It is too white. The shadow under the card is wrong, also.
We will pause a moment to study this Riverside murder (from Southern California, not from the Bay Area). Many red flags pop up here, including the name and the date. Her last name was Bates, same as the character from the 1960 movie Psycho.
Psycho was filmed at Universal City, which is a suburb of Los Angeles. Riverside is also basically a suburb of Los Angeles, about 30 miles from Universal City. We are told the date was October 30, 1966, but the murder was said to have taken place between 10pm and 1am.
A watch found nearby was stopped at 12:23, so that indicates the struggle happened then, after midnight. That made it Halloween, so the date could just as easily and accurately be stated as October 31. Her body was found on Halloween and her death was reported on Halloween.
Cheri Jo was a thin blonde, like Janet Leigh in Psycho. They both had short hair.
Bates' father worked at the Naval Ordnance Lab in Corona and her brother was also serving in the navy. No one (I read) has ever made the connection, but both a military watch and heelprint from a military boot were found at the alleged murder scene.
This would point back at her father or brother, obviously, but the police and investigators never went there. I assume they didn't go there because the murder was faked. You don't pursue anyone in a fake murder.
The watch and bootprint were only indication her family was in on the scam. They had to give her a ride home, since her car was part of the fake.
It is her father who allegedly reported her missing. This is another red flag. According to the story, a janitor found Bates' body early the next morning. So Bates had only been missing overnight. You can't file a missing persons report that soon without cause.
Since Bates was a college student, her coming home late one night would not be considered cause and the police would tell her father to get lost. I will be told the waiting period is an urban legend, but that is only true if there is some cause.
The father would have no reason to believe mischief had occurred—unless he caused it—and Cheri was not a child. So it is very unlikely a report could have been filed before Cheri was found the next morning. It is simply not logical.
A note was sent to police, claiming responsibility. Although police accepted it as genuine, the writer appeared to know very little about the actual murder. He said that she did not struggle, for instance, when the crime report indicates just the opposite. He also says this:
That is mighty suspicious, since serial killers are not known for their empathy or their community spirit or their concern for people's daughters. This note reads like it was written from the police department or the government.
The writer is trying to scare young women straight, teaching them to be careful. Serial killers don't talk that way; town fathers do. This reads like a very stiff public service announcement.
To see what I mean, I recommend you watch the movie The Village, by M. Night Shyamalan. In it, the town elders concoct a gruesome and detailed series of events to scare the young people from wanting to go into the forest.
It is all for their own good, since the “world is a dangerous place.” This is precisely what our own community elders were doing with these faked murders. Or, originally this was the intent.
Later they began to use faked events to control us in other ways, but up until the mid 1960's, I believe the elders often had good intent. I no longer believe that.
Also curious is that the scene of the Bates event just happened to match the scene of an attempted murder one year earlier. Detective Gren admitted, “The two cases were identical in many ways.”
They were so identical the police's first suspect was the man convicted of the previous crime in the summer of 1965. Unfortunately, they found he had not escaped from jail.
This is a huge red flag, since it indicates those in charge of the Bates event chose their location with care, both to give it a dose of authenticity as well as to tie it to previous mischief.
But here is the strangest thing in the entire Bates event:
But here is the strangest thing in the entire Bates event:
That exchange is from the http://Zodiackiller.com message boards, June 11, 2001. And here is the picture: That's the smoking gun an investigator looks for!
Everyone didn't have cellphones with photographing capabilities back then of course, so the odds against Bates having her picture taken in that library before her murder are astronomical.
Whoever the photographer was, we have to ask, “Why was he there taking pictures of Bates right before her murder?”
Fred Bauman was a photographer for the Riverside Press-Enterprise newspaper, so apparently the local newspaper knew Bates was going to be a major news story before she was murdered.
They assigned one of their own people to go down to the library and get a picture of her, so they would have a sort of before and after shot, I guess. That alone is enough to put this fake event to rest.
Another red flag pops up in the Bates event. Bates is said to have gone to San Francisco the weekend before to be with her boyfriend. He was said to play football for SF State College. A female friend of Bates testified they were to be married.
But according to other female friends of Bates, she was going to meet her boyfriend at the library the night of the murder. That meeting couldn't have been with the SFSC guy, since he never left SF that weekend. Now, this is very curious, and it demands we unwind it.
Your first assumption might be that Cheri Jo had two boyfriends, one she intended to marry and one she was just playing around with. At her age, that would be a fair assumption. However, given that we have a link to San Francisco here, we shouldn't be content with that assumption
If we dig a bit, we find police soon discounted the testimony of the girls who said Cheri was meeting her boyfriend that night, although the girls recounted the testimony on TV. On what grounds did they dismiss some of the only meaningful testimony obtained so far: none.
They dismissed it as hearsay, apparently because it didn't fit the story they were building. But shouldn't you build your story from witness testimony? Not in this case. This should only raise your suspicion further.
It already looks like the police were being controlled, leading the public directly away from any real evidence— especially evidence that might prove a hoax.
Anyway, it isn't the boyfriend at the library that is suspicious, it is the boyfriend in San Francisco. His name was Dennis Highland, and given what we already know, I would guess he wasn't her boyfriend or fiancé. That is just a cover story.
The fact that she was there the weekend before indicates she was there receiving training for the event. So Highland was probably her contact or handler. They were probably planning her move from Riverside after the event as well, which may or may not have been to San Francisco.
It is doubtful they would move her only that far, since someone might recognize her, but it is easy to fool people with wigs.
Even so, given the press the Zodiac event turned out getting over the next decade, Cheri would have to be in disguise for a long time, until she started aging. I would guess she was taken further away than San Francisco. Maybe they sent her down to Brazil to hang with Sharon Tate
To move on, the logical thing to do is look up Dennis E. Highland's dad, to find the expected military link. They have made that very hard to do. All information on this Highland family appears to have been scrubbed, at least from the internet.
A people search puts Dennis at age 67 in San Luis Obispo, but I could find no information on his father. I did find a mention that Cheri had traveled to San Francisco the weekend before with Highland's parents.
That by itself is curious, because at age 18/19, Cheri and Dennis wouldn't have wanted Mom and Dad along, especially if they were really courting. Cheri had her own car, as we know, so she didn't need to hitch a ride.
My reading of this fact is that Cheri had been driven up to SF by Dad, who was military intelligence. Eventually, I found a grave for Harry Edward Highland. Since the grave is in Riverside, the birth year is right, and Harry is a veteran, we may have a match.
Harry was a Technical Sergeant in the Air Corps. I had expected a higher rank, so this may or may not be the guy.
More here: http://mileswmathis.com/updates.html
