The Zodiac Killer and The Most Dangerous Game
-
phishman42 — 18 years ago(November 29, 2007 10:31 AM)
actually, the movie IS based in fact, it is a movie version of the book of the same name written by robert graysmith who was portrayed by jake gyllenhaal (sp?) in the film.
while some facts were omitted, and some event chronology changed to help with the flow of the film, all of the facts presented in the film are true.
and as for DNA, there was no DNA sample to compare anything to. he was ruled out by comparison to one fingerprint found in the taxi cab of paul stine, but that was never for sure the zodiac's print in the first place.
pretty much, there was never any physical evidence of the killer, all only circumstantial, which is why they could not build a case against him (allen) as people usually are not convicted of crimes judged solely on circumstance alone. -
bmks — 18 years ago(March 22, 2008 04:08 PM)
Actually, the DNA does not rule him out. Many of Lee's friends have stated that he had them lick stamps for him, so that does not rule him out.
Last Movie: Horton Hears a Who
Fav. Movie last year: Halloween 2007/Grindhouse/Die Hard 4 -
bob_meg — 17 years ago(March 24, 2009 10:57 PM)
ExactlyAllen was an incredibly cunning criminal. There are over 30 pieces of incriminating (but circumstantial) evidence against him. he can be placed at or near the scene of almost every documented attack and was even positively ID'ed by victim Mike Mageau.
Yet to this day we still get the "oh, his fingerprints were never a match, the DNA was not a match, blah blah." Zodiac bragged of putting glue on his fingertips to disguise himself and Allen has been accused of the same by people who knew him, and the DNA test actually did match in one test but then subsequently didn't match in others, pointing to your theory of the licked stamps, which Allen's friends have verified he was known to ask of his guests.
Allen got away with it on his sheer sociopathic brilliance combined with police incompetance and miscommuncation.
I have to wonder about anyone who rules Allen out as a suspectthere is no other person with more circumstantial evidence piled against him. Anyone can be linked with a few pieces of evidence.you get to over thirtycome on! -
mikear70 — 16 years ago(April 30, 2009 05:38 PM)
Now, we know Allen isn't the Zodiac. I saw on Channel 4 today, when a woman has come towardsaying her father was the killer. You may be able to find it online. Get this, she claims she was with him during two of the killing. She was a girl and he lefted her sitting in the car. She heard gun shots later. When he return, she asked him about it and he said it was just firecracks. He died of cancer a few months ago. And his picture does match the drawing. She also says she still has the glasses to one of the victims. I'm going to search for it on Channel 4 and post a link.
-
mikear70 — 16 years ago(April 30, 2009 05:45 PM)
I found a better link.
http://www.ktvu.com/news/19322231/detail.html -
GethinVanH — 15 years ago(March 24, 2011 07:49 PM)
In response to the woman saying her father was the Zodiac killer. She's a kook. She also claimed she was the illegitimate daughter of Jackie Kennedy. The identity of the killer remains unknown.
http://www.truecrimereport.com/2009/05/deborah_perez_and_the_zodiacjf. php -
Kevinbloodywilsonfan — 17 years ago(July 30, 2008 01:28 PM)
I'd take a Hollywood flick with a pinch of salt, even though it uses a lot of the actual case files, it borrows heavily from the book that fingers Leigh. All the evidence pointy to him are a mix of coincidence and circunstancial. He passed handwriting test, d.n.a and several lie detector test whilst he was doing time for child molestatiuon. I'm not conviced there ever was a real Zodiac, mmost victims can be directly linked to californian drugs cartels.
-
dmh7-1 — 18 years ago(July 17, 2007 03:17 AM)
I think they pretty much knew who it was, but couldn't quite "make the case". The suspect died (of a heart attack) before they were able to interview him one more time, based on new information. Legally it remains unsolved, but there is little doubt they had their man.
-
kauffner — 18 years ago(September 23, 2007 12:34 AM)
It's more likely Zodiac learned about The Most Dangerous Game from the short story, which is anthologized in many school readers. If you wanted to see an old movie in 1969, you couldn't just go to a video rental shop or flip on cable. Zodiac supposedly saw The Most Dangerous Game at a San Francisco arthouse. Perhaps he was motivated to see this particular movie because he had already read the short story.
-
The_Loonatic — 18 years ago(September 30, 2007 12:11 AM)
As the case of the Zodiac is a bunch of drawn out conclusions and twisting coincedences revolving around his murders, letters, weapons, and name, Zodiac saw this upon himself and took advantage of it which is another reason why this case is so bizzare. You don't know what is what and you're never sure if this is how it really played out. Whoever the Zodiac was, he knew how extremely lucky he was to have all this gossip surround his new form of power to scare the public and make a name for himself.
-
DylansFearFiles — 17 years ago(June 16, 2008 05:35 PM)
Arthur Leigh Allen's DNA possibly didn't match the DNA on one of the letters because according to Don Cheney (the informant) he had other people lick the letter seals because "the taste of the glue made him sick".