Live data from Hacker News

Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

fox13now.com

121–130 of 221 posts

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#121
post #98

Now that we have maybe identified somebody who killed, what, 37 people?, let's start identifying individuals responsible for millions of more horrendous deaths, often drawn out over months of suffering, and maybe try to stop them. The guys who first put lead in gasoline are long dead already. There were people who fought getting it out of the gasoline, and they are mostly dead, by now, too. Likewise, leaded paint. Th…

> Robert Lustig videos on Youtube are a great way to start learning about this. Or off YT: https://videos.lukesmith.xyz/w/feioCyaQEZ1ogHK1oNJM4K > Thus, the people taking fiber out of and putting sugar into everything are the biggest current mass killers. Stringing them up may be an over-reaction. Maybe convicting them would be, too? Anyway stopping them seems like a good idea. Think about them next time the news is…

I like to play the videos at 1.5x-2x speed, with subtitles. That makes a 90-minute lecture take a more easily found 60 or 45 minutes.

Tobacco advertising is banned in the US, and tobacco use is in decline there. (The US State Department works to outlaw bans in other countries. True!) A ban on advertising sugar-laced products -- high sugar-to-fiber ratio products, specifically -- ought to help.

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#122
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would indeed be convincing, but I can't seem to find any further information on it. Here is the Case Breaker's blog announcement[1]. And here is a press release from them with some details of their work[2]. I'd really like to see this in action, but it seems like they haven't published it yet. Am I missing it? [1] https://thecasebreakers.org/2021/09/the-last-zodiac-victim/ [2] https://secureservercdn.net/166.62.…

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

But there's no reasonable motive for the Zodiac Killer to do so. If he wanted to frame Gary Poaste, he would plant evidence that was more obvious. If he wanted to toy with the detectives who were trying to discover his identity though--which is well within the pattern of behavior observed from the Zodiac Killer--this is exactly the sort of thing he would do.

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#123
post #119
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The saturated fat is not only totally harmless, I was under the impression that you should still keep a balance between unsaturated and saturated fats to keep cholesterol in check?

I have not heard of any such thing. Inuit who have never had access to unsaturated fat do not start getting heart disease until they adopt a supermarket-driven diet. Cholesterol as a measure of health is driven to some degree by Big Pharma, who would like to have everyone taking statins for the whole rest of their lives. Certainly, dietary cholesterol is absolutely harmless, always has been.

According to an article on PubMed, that's largely a myth, based on early, faulty studies [1].

[1] "Low incidence of cardiovascular disease among the Inuit--what is the evidence?"

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#124

I'll need some more evidence to believe it. They're strongly citing the "scars" on his forehead which, to my eye, look a lot like the wrinkles on anyone's forehead.

If you look closely, different people don't tend to have matching forehead wrinkles.

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#125
post #10

What are the ethics of potentially identifying deceased people as baddies? Unless there is DNA evidence which remains(which I doubt), or they find incontrovertible evidence in his home or something like that(I also doubt), this is just a guess that will drastically affect his probably otherwise-normal family whether the allegations are true or not.

This was my first thought as well.

Other ethics include the press now reaching out to the surviving family of this man? "So and so, who call themselves investigators, say your father is the Zodiac Killer! Thoughts?"

Are there rules around this crap?

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article > In one note, the letters of Poste's full name were removed to reveal an alternate message, she told Fox News. "So you've got to know Gary's full name in order to decipher these anagrams," Bucholtz said. "I just don't think there's any other way anybody would have figured it out." To me it's pretty coincidental if the letters for this person's full name just happen to be this person who also has oth…

#1 This is a pretty big claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And yet there is no evidence. -or- #2 It also sounds like they're saying if you remove various letters of the alphabet from a cipher, you can get a readable message. This is not notable.

#2 seems very notable

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#127
post #113
post #33

So two new pieces of evidence are offered up by this article, firstly that Zodiac was identified by several witnesses as having a forehead scar, including being drawn on the famous sketch of him, which matches a scar Poste had at the time. Secondly, some sort of new solution to the cipher is possible by omitting Poste's full name in some way. As exciting as it would be, I always take these claims about famous cases b…

The guy REALLY looks like the police sketches too. Almost perfectly the same, except for maybe a slight difference in nose width.

Does anyone else have issues with identifying and describing facial features. I have no problems recognizing people, but there’s no way I can verbalize them on a specific features basis. What kind of disorder do I have?

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#128
post #19
post #9

Looking at the press release [1], it still feels relatively circumstantial to me. Not sure that we can deem the Zodiac Killer to be fully identified yet. It's definitely not nearly as cut and dry as when they identified the Golden State killer. [1]: https://secureservercdn.net/166.62.114.250/g9q.07b.myftpuplo...

Do you know what circumstantial means? It doesn't mean "weak". It means "pertaining to circumstances". Nearly all evidence is circumstantial. DNA is circumstantial evidence. Fingerprints are circumstantial evidence. A smoking gun is circumstantial evidence. Trials are based on circumstantial evidence. Hans Reiser was arrested, tried, and convicted of murdering his wife based on nothing but circumstantial evidence tha…

Other than first-hand knowledge, all evidence is circumstantial. In response to all your detractors comments: looking up words in English dictionaries for law jargon is a bad idea, you will get yourself thrown in the dock. Blacks Law dictionary only.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. The term in- cludes all evidence of indirect nature. Milligan v. State, 109 Fla. 219, 147 So. 260, 263. It is direct evidence as to facts deposed to but indirect as to the factum probandum, Brown v. State, 126 Tex.Cr.R. 449, 72 S.W.2d 269, 270; evidence of facts or circumstances from which the existence or nonexistence of fact in issue may be inferred. People v. Steele, 37 N.Y.S.2d 199, 200, 179 Misc. 587; Wolff v. Employers Fire Ins. Co., 282 Ky. 824, 140 S.W.2d 640, 645, 130 A.L.R. 682; Scott v. State, 57 Ga.App. 489, 195 S.E. 923, 924; inferences drawn from facts proved, Hatfield v. Levy Bros., 18 Ca1.2d 798, 117 P. 2d 841, 845; preponderance of probabilities, Hercules Pow- der Co., v. Nieratko, 113 N.J.L. 188, 173 A. 606, 610; pro- cess of decision by which court or jury may reason from circumstances known or proved, to establish by inference the principal fact, People v. Taddio, 292 N.Y. 488, 55 N.E. 2d 749, 750. It means that existence of principal facts is only inferred from circumstances. Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Lonas, 255 Ky. 717, 75 S.W.2d 348, 350. When the existence of the principal fact is deduced from evidentiary by a process of probable reasoning, the evi- dence and proof are said to be presumptive. Best, Pres. 246; Id. 12. All presumptive evidence is circumstantial be- cause necessarily derived from or made up of circum- stances, but all circumstantial evidence is not presumptive. Burrill. The proof of various facts or circumstances which usual- ly attend the main fact in dispute, and therefore tend to prove its existence, or to sustain, by their consistency, the hypothesis claimed. Or as otherwise defined, it consists in reasoning from facts which are known or proved to es- tablish such as are conjectured to exist.

INDIRECT EVIDENCE. Is that which only tends to establish the issue by proof of various facts sustaining by their consistency the hypothesis claimed. It consists of both inferences and pre- sumptions. Lake County v. Neilon, 44 Or. 14, 74 P. 212, 214.

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#129
post #19
post #9

Looking at the press release [1], it still feels relatively circumstantial to me. Not sure that we can deem the Zodiac Killer to be fully identified yet. It's definitely not nearly as cut and dry as when they identified the Golden State killer. [1]: https://secureservercdn.net/166.62.114.250/g9q.07b.myftpuplo...

Do you know what circumstantial means? It doesn't mean "weak". It means "pertaining to circumstances". Nearly all evidence is circumstantial. DNA is circumstantial evidence. Fingerprints are circumstantial evidence. A smoking gun is circumstantial evidence. Trials are based on circumstantial evidence. Hans Reiser was arrested, tried, and convicted of murdering his wife based on nothing but circumstantial evidence tha…

People don't know how to judge evidence. So they think circumstantial evidence has no weight

Re: Investigators say they've finally identified the Zodiac Killer

#130
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guy REALLY looks like the police sketches too. Almost perfectly the same, except for maybe a slight difference in nose width.

Does anyone else have issues with identifying and describing facial features. I have no problems recognizing people, but there’s no way I can verbalize them on a specific features basis. What kind of disorder do I have?

Perhaps the artists are trained to ask questions of witnesses that reveal details you wouldn't be able to give up unprompted?
Post reply on HN