Say something about yourself!
If you listen closely to the details, you will see that it was a cop. Whether all of the murders the zodiac took credit for are even related is questionable.
Most murderers don't choose to change their weapons or the way in which they kill. The only time you see a variation in weapons/methods is generally with contracted murders. Some of the murders appear to be crimes of passion, others appears to be done in a manner that would suggest a vendetta, and others appear to be completely random.
Psychopathic murderers have one particular type of victim that they pursue, the zodiac did not. So far, I've read through the first 5 murders, and none of them appear to contain a sexual aspect of any kind.
The "zodiac" definitely had a military background, and was probably a contracted killer. The police had close ties with witnesses and at least one victim, and at one point at least, the police told two witnesses what they saw rather than simply taking their statements.
Personally, I don't think all the murders were related. Someone created the "zodiac" personna, and that gave other people who wanted to commit murder the opportunity to make it look like it was the crazed zodiac killer. But if they were related, the style in which the victims were killed, the marksmanship with the gun that was used, the use of many different used cars (which police have access to via their impound lot), the manner in which some of the investigations were done, and the nonsensical zodiac code (which appears to be a distraction for the police more than anything else), leads me to believe the culprit was a member of the Vallejo police department.
Whether the officer actually committed all the murders himself is uncertain, but he certainly wanted to take credit for them, and most likely DID know WHO committed the murders. Too bad forensics and profiling were so undeveloped in the late 1960s and 70s, At this point in the book (about halfway), it is frustrating to listen to the details because it seems so very obvious to me. I don't claim to have "cracked the case", but they were definitely looking in the wrong directions.
A lot of facts and a lot of details I did not know about. Also very interesting and well told. Very well read.
I have never read or listened to a less gripping story about a serial killer. While I had expected a narrative based more on facts than thrilling plot lines, it was a struggle to make myself finish this book. The narrator's voice is pleasant, but I got the feeling that while he did his best, the material was too dry to be saved by even the best narration. The book has all the emotion of a commission report. I bought this book as part of a 2 for 1 deal on select titles through my monthly audible subscription. I should have just saved my points until the next month.
The book lacked emotion and so did Stefan's reading. Not sure which affected the other more, but the book mostly reads like someone reading the facts of the police reports. Sure, there isn't much insight on the killer's thoughts and actions (outside of the times of the killings) since he was never caught, but that shouldn't have stopped Graysmith from being able to set the scene a little better and present the crimes as shocking as they really were.
I'm a huge true crime fan, but couldn't get more than a third through this book. Large portions are just police reports being read aloud.