Who do you think did it?

[Amelia G]

I think a really paid thriller writer, Patricia Cornwell, did an exhaustive search on Jack the Ripper a year or two ago and is generally believed to have found who that was.

[Amelia G]

Here we go. From Patricia Cornwell's site:

The identity of the killer has remained one of the world's greatest unsolved mysteries, and a wealth of theories have been posited which have pointed the finger at royalty, a barber, a doctor, a woman, and an artist. Using her formidable range of forensic and technical skills, Patricia Cornwell has applied the rigorous discipline of 21st century police investigation to the extant material, and here presents the hard evidence that the perpetrator of the Whitechapel Murders was the world famous artist, Walter Sickert.



By using techniques unknown in the late Victorian era, Patricia Cornwell has exposed Sickert as the author of the infamous Ripper letters to the Metropolitan Police. Her detailed analysis of his paintings show that his art continually depicted his horrific mutilation of his victims, and her examination of this man's birth defects, the consequent genital surgical interventions, and their effects on his upbringing present a casebook example of how a psychopathic killer is created.

With her knowledge of criminal investigation and her consummate skills as a bestselling writer, Patricia Cornwell has produced a book which is as compelling as it is authentic and pays due respect to the people whose early deaths spawned one of the twentieth century's least attractive entertainment industries -- Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddows, and Mary Kelly.



I haven't read this book of hers, but she is an excellent writer and supposedly spent mad cash on the research for this.

[gonesavage]

Here we go. From Patricia Cornwell's site: ...



I haven't read this book of hers, but she is an excellent writer and supposedly spent mad cash on the research for this.

Cool, you found the book! Ever since reading posts here about Jack the Ripper, in the back of my mind I knew I saw a book written recently about the case and its evidence. I was too lazy to look it up, and I kept forgetting to post about it.

She is a good writer. I've read ~6 of her books. Yay, Amelia!

[Amelia G]

Cool, you found the book! Ever since reading posts here about Jack the Ripper, in the back of my mind I knew I saw a book written recently about the case and its evidence. I was too lazy to look it up, and I kept forgetting to post about it.

She is a good writer. I've read ~6 of her books. Yay, Amelia!

I especially like her stuff for airport reading. Kinda like a John Grisham, easy fast compelling read that takes you away from where you are.

I'm an excellent researcher

[CeruleanFire]

I read everything about the Zodiac.

I actually have never read anything on The Zodiac, I will have to check it out.

[CeruleanFire]

I especially like her stuff for airport reading. Kinda like a John Grisham, easy fast compelling read that takes you away from where you are.

I'm an excellent researcher

Yes, you are. I read part of the book. Unfortunately somewheres I have misplaced it, and havent finished it. I do know that her critics verbally slammed her, despite her using scientific research. I see Im going to have hunt around and find that book.

[CeruleanFire]

heres a link I found regarding the Lizzie Borden case, in case anyone was interested, although it is quite in-depth http://www.crimelibrary.com/lizzie/lizziemain.htm I did my research paper on it in my criminal evidence class, and I had access to some very old difficult to get books. (Thanks Mom, she worked in the Library system, helped me get an A) The thing I found the most intriquing, is that the sheriff who took the statement from Lizzie was never allowed to testify at her trial, some say because the judge had been a close family friend of her family, and was trying to help protect her. I guess he succeeded. But thats just MY opinion.

[Morning Glory]

I read everything about the Zodiac.

Since Vaughn doesn't post here anymore, does anyone else know information about this case?

The Zodiac killer is one of the most researched serial killings because so little is actually known about it. Like Jack the Ripper, the killer sent taunting messages to the police taking credit for his crimes and was never caught. Most of the investigation has been done by amateurs because it's the job of the police to collect evidence to convict a suspect (which as I said could not be done), not to wildly speculate trying to solve the mystery.

In his letters sent over a period of ten years the Zodiac claimed to have killed 37 people. Based on the physical evidence, the author of the letters could only be conclusively tied to one victim. And even that could be doubtful if one was conspiratorial enough. The evidence was a bloody cloth in the time before DNA profiling existed. The shirt of the victim that it supposedly came from was later lost by police so it can never be matched.

I've read Robert Graysmith's book Zodiac: Unmasked. He claims that Zodiac is with no doubt the suspect Arthur Leigh Allen. Interestingly, every other amateur detective says that there is no way that it could be Allen.

The fact is that all the evidence points to Allen and it could not be any other suspect. That doesn't mean that Allen did it and there is proof, just that it couldn't have been anyone else either. The only way that we will ever know for sure who did it is if new evidence somehow surfaces.

There is good reason to doubt Graysmith, but the "evidence" against Allen cannot be explained, while the "proof" of his innocence can easily be dismissed.

-Allen was in Riverside, CA at the time of the first suspected Zodiac murder (1966). Allen lived and worked in Vallejo in close proximity to the victims of the next two attacks (1969). He was near Lake Berryessa the day of the murder there (1969).

-After he was questioned by police (1971), no Zodiac letter was shipped for almost three years. After that no letter contained a piece of bloody cloth from Zodiac's last known 1969 SF murder.

-When Allen was sent to prison in 1974, no Zodiac letters were sent during that time. Allen pleaded, 'If the Zodiac writes one letter I'll be off the hook'.

-Within months of his release the infamous 1978 Zodiac letter was sent.

This time line is the most damning testimony against Arthur Leigh Allen. The only explanation for it besides his guilt is coincidence- a coincidence that applies to no one else.

The reasons cited for his innocence and why they can be dismissed:

-No evidence was found linking him to the murders in searches of his trailer in Santa Rosa in 1971, and his home and boats in Vallejo in 1991.

His parent's home in Vallejo was not searched in 1971, along with at least one other trailer and boats, where the evidence could have been. No reason to believe that if the evidence did exist in 1971 there, he would have still kept it when searched again 20 years later.

- No ballistics match to Allen's guns.

Each time the killer used a different weapon. There is no reason to believe that Zodiac did not discard his weapons after use.

-The handwriting from the letters did not match Allen's.

Handwriting analysis is not conclusive and there have been notations of changes in writing within the letters, even though they are all attributed to the same person. Intentionally faked handwriting and psychotic personalty change could cause differences in writing. Experts also disagree about the authenticity of the 1978 letter and have ruled others as copy cats.

-Fingerprints from the SF crime scene and partial palm print from letter did not match Allen's.

They didn't match each other either. No elimination prints were taken from people at SF scene. The partial print was from a suspected fake letter. No reason to believe that these prints were left by Zodiac.

-DNA sample did not match Allen's.

The DNA was from the suspected fake 1978 letter. None of the other letters contained DNA traces. There is no reason to suspect that Zodiac licked his stamps.

[Morning Glory]

Hey, it's been a long time. I wanted to make a few corrections to what I said about the Zodiac case. I was new to the case at that time and wanted to be objective. Now I know a lot more and many of the things I said are incorrect.

I don't believe that Arthur Leigh Allen is the Zodiac or even a good suspect. He's merely the suspect that got the most attention. There is no evidence to connect him to the crimes. The only real connection is that he was a creepy dude that lived in the city where the crimes occurred. All of the suspects in the case that have been revealed to the public are people that were given to police by informants who for the most part turned them in because of personal reasons not related to the crimes. Allen was most likely brought to police attention because his neighbor complained about his dog. All of the information about him as the killer came from a person who suspected that Allen, a convicted sex offender, had tried to molest his daughter and gave information about his supposed involvement in the crimes that were already public knowledge from the news.

The timeline I gave is also misleading and slanted in a way to make him look more suspicious. While it is true that no letters were sent while he was in prison, the letters stopped coming for nearly a year before he went to prison and the most letters sent in a single period occurred after he had been questioned by police, in defiance of the notion that the letters stopped when police were on to him. The letters resumed after he got out of prison, but not for another six months, contrary to the notion that " a new letter arrived as soon as he got out." And that letter from 78 has pretty much been proven to be a fake. I also said that was the DNA tested against him, but it was actually from a confirmed 74 letter.

Out of all the people I've ever heard about there is only one person who I consider to be a possible Zodiac suspect. That persons name appears in Robert Graysmith's book but he has not been publicly accused. I don't want to be a dick and tease but I won't say the name because I think it's irresponsible to publicly accuse people of involvement with crimes who are not suspects given out by police.

For other famous Unsolved murders...

Patricia Cornwell's suspect Walter Sickert was definitely a Ripper fanboy and there's a good case that he wrote some of the hoax letters. Most of her information about him comes from the debunked hoax diary of Jack the Ripper, and I don't think he's a good suspect for the murders. I'd say the best suspect is Montague Druitt, a dude that had a mental breakdown during the time of the murders and then killed himself just after they stopped. He was the police's top suspect. I don't really think he did it, just that out of the suspects he's the only good one.

Lizzie Borden probably did it. The dude with the Lindbergh ransom money probably did it. I don't really know anything about Elizabeth Short aka. The Black Dahlia, so I can't comment. I don't think the Ramsey's did it, but I do think they were involved somehow and probably wrote the ransom note. OJ probably did it... but he was also probably framed by the LAPD because they are racist, so he deserved to get away with it.

[Mr Karl]

yeah....OJ probably did it

[VoltaireBlue]

proffessor plum, in the library, with the candle stick.

[Morning Glory]

proffessor plum, in the library, with the candle stick.

Yeah, but who was the victim? We should have at least gotten a couple severed body parts in the box. I think Prof. Plum deserves a mistrial!