No comments about Zodiac Killer.

No comments about The Zodiac Killer (Crime Scene Investigations).

5 comments about The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers: A Study of the Chilling Criminal Phenomenon from the Angels of Death to the Zodiac Killer (Facts on File Crime Library).

1. Expanded and updated edition of his original that came out in 2000. There are now entries on cases that have been solved since the first edition was released. Examples: Gary Leon Ridgway, the Green River Killer and Dennis Rader, the BTK Strangler. Other cases have been expanded. Some that were only listed in the appendixes now have entries in the main section.
   The author uses the definition of a serial killer as someone who murders 2 or more persons, done as separate events. This leads to inclusion of some killers that most people would not consider serial killers. I understand the author going for a more inclusive approach than otherwise. If he didn't go this route, there would inevitably be complaints about killers left out.
   I spotted very few errors and none that I would categorize as major.
   I would like to see a much more comprehensive index. Trying to find an entry if all you remember is a victim name or an odd location is difficult.
   The entries range from a few paragraphs to several pages. Still, if you want a detailed read on a specific case, you will need to get a book devoted to that killer. There are entries on some killers that there hasn't been a book written about, such as Melvin Rees.
   Of the three SK Encyclopedias I've read, this is the best, in my opinion.
   The reviews for the first edition are still mostly applicable here. I recommend reading them for other viewpoints.



2. This is a fascinating read for true crime buffs. The author's stated purpose is to "demystify, as far as possible, those predators in human form who have been with us since the dawn of history..." Serial killers at large are so frightening that they end up touching all of our lives--most especially in the United States, where 84% of all known serial killers have committed their crimes since 1980. I first became aware of this type of human predator when I was a student at the University of Michigan, and John Norman Collins was murdering coeds with pierced ears and long brown hair.
   
   California native Michael Newton has published 181 books since 1977, including 147 novels but he is best known for his true crime and reference works. I have to say that I assumed this author was British because of his concise, witty style and also for his tendency to critique other true crime authors who failed to get their facts straight, including the names of a serial killer's victims. One of his special peeves is the term 'spree killer,' and he also doesn't seem to think much of profilers.
   
   Most of the entries in this encyclopedia are concerned with the serial killers themselves, whether they acted alone, in twosomes, or in packs. One of the biggest surprises for me was the large number of serial killers who are or were women. Something like 12% of all serial killers are female, and Hungarian women seem especially prone to this behavior, starting with Countess Erzsebet Bthory in the sixteenth century whose final body count was somewhere between 300 and 650 victims. In the early 1900s,Vera Renczi murdered 35 husbands, lovers, and a son and was arrested by the police only after they searched her basement and discovered 35 zinc coffins. "Some evenings, Vera liked to sit among the coffins in an armchair and enjoy the company of her adoring beaux." Then there were the "Angel Makers of Nagyrev"...
   
   Well, let me just close by remarking that "The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers" is an extremely interesting source of information on the darker side of human nature. In addition to the encyclopedia entries, there are also appendices on "Solo Killers," "Team Killers," and "Unresolved Cases," plus an extensive bibliography.



3. A friend of mine gave me this book, and normally I don't read. However, on a road trip, I decided to read some of the book and became very interested, QUICKLY! The book is quite detailed, and I liked the fact that there was information in the book on serial killers from the 1800's and earlier (Erzsebet Bathory born in 1560). A great, well-written book!



4. This is one of the best books availible for those interested in True Crime and the history of Serial Killers. The author has compiled a fast read and profiles for each person. Very detailed, It is a basic knowledge of the essential info. If you want more detailed profiles of certain serial killers i would recommend that you buy a book based on a certian individual.
   
   But this is a great basic info source.
   
   Most Recommended.



5. It's a pretty long read but it does contain some written material that might be inappropiate for some readers.What I really like about this book is the aspect of every serial killer which deals about their background as well as why would they committe such a crime that forever haunt us till this very day.Michael Newton does provide info that'll help us think and learn about who they are and what they are.Make no mistake that this book will give you everything you need to know about them except the only thing I wish that this book should have is more photos.Anyway,do yourself a favor and check this book out.

5 comments about Sleep My Little Dead: The True Story of the Zodiac Killer (St. Martin's true crime library).

1. Kieran Crowley, veteran NY Post crime reporter, captures the essence of the NYPD's police investigation, the pain of the victim's, and the haunting horror of the Zodiac Killer's crimes. True crime stories can't be better written. Crowley's attention to detail is unmatched. Kudos!



2. I read a lot of true crime books and all I can say is: spend the money and read the book. Crowley really gets into the mind of the killer. Awesome story-telling.



3. Save your time, save your money, don't purchase this book.

   Yes, in NYC this guy was called the Zodiac, but this author uses California's infamous Zodiac Killer symbol, etc. on the cover. So much for imagination.

   The book itself is a total waste of time, the writing is poor, there are spelling and grammatical mistakes throughout. If I could have given this book a zero star rating I would have.

   If you want good true Crime check out books by Graysmith, Keppel, Rule, Bledsoe and Carlton Smith, these names are KNOWN in the True Crime genre, Crowley is not.




4. I've read material safety data sheets more engaging than this. Stick with Graysmith or others if you want a good read.



5. THIS BOOK GIVEs INSIGHT TO A SMALL PERSON WHO WAS NOT THE BIGGEST OR BEST OF THE SERIAL KILLERS I HAVE READ ABOUT. THIS PERSON WAS VERY RANDOM AND JUST WANTED TO MAKE HIMSELF A NAME.HE TRIED TO PATTERN HIMSELF AFTER THE ORIGINAL ZODIAC KILLER & DID NOT DO A GOOD JOB AT THIS. APPEARS TO BE A YOUNG PERSON WHO HAD MENTAL ISSUES THAT GOT TOTALLY OUT OF HAND & DESTROYED PERSONS LIVES IN THE PROCESS. A GOOD BOOK BUT NOT THE BEST I HAVE READ!!

1 comments about Zodiac [UNABRIDGED].

1. I have just recently begun to listen to books on cd. I had read Zodiac many times and also read the follow up book Zodiac Unmasked and they are still best-sellers today. This is extremely well researched and well presented. I loved having this book on cd and I don't think any other author could have done a better job on the topic. I listened it to it on a road trip and it was so entertaining and scary.. Even in the daytime!
   
   This book is VERY good! Robert Graysmith worked at the San Francisco chronicle during the time period this all happened and he did his share of research. He put together a very informative book about one of the killers who taunted police while killing many and GETTING AWAY WITH IT! I think this is a must read for any true crime fan and especially fans of the Zodiac. I thought Robert Graysmith did an excellent job on writing this book and I learned a lot about the case from this book.
   
   It is above and beyond your typical and ever-so-predictable generic ... true crime paperbacks. This book is the best about the most enigmatic case in the history of true crimes story. I love good written book and this book is very very well written. I give this one 5 stars because of the drama, the tension and the facts that give action to this book.
   
   Full/comprehensive account of the most chilling (in my opinion) true-crime story of the 20th century. If you don't mind hearing a writing style comparable to a Police Report, than you'll really enjoy this. I can't imagine a more detailed analysis of those crimes and, since Graysmith was close to the action, his opinions carry weight. From what I can tell, this is the best account available of these crimes and I would recommend this audio cd highly.

5 comments about "This Is the Zodiac Speaking": Into the Mind of a Serial Killer.

1. Look no further, this is the Zodiac book that is worth your investment of money and time. Simply excellent, both factually and as entertainment.



2. Michael Kellehers book on the Zodiac killer is well worth the time and effort and money to obtain and read!
   Having researched the Zodiac case since 1987(zodiacmurders.com) I would say his book is a crisp tight narrative that fully lays out the case with exactness as he makes the story interesting while giving the reader a multi-faceted view into all aspects of the killers mind and criminal activities.
   Many have related they just 'couldn't put it down' until they read the entire book!
   One correction I would like to make- while STILL focusing on this fine work-is that it says Bill Nelson wrote a book on the possible connection of the Zodiac to Charles Manson and some of his associate/s.Only a small portion of the book presents this link.The majority of the content in Nelsons (now out of print) book, is about the Manson Family.It is my book ,The Zodiac Manson Connection, that has, as its MAIN theme,a possible link to the Manson Family.
   Get Kellehers book is all I can say-a must for the true crime buff and members of law enforcement!



3. Flowing prose and a penchant for sticking to the established facts make this book a must for anyone interested in the Zodiac. DEFINATELY read it if you think that the recent film ("Zodiac") is some type of definitive presentation of the what really happened in this truly remarkable case.



4. This is a fine book for those who know nothing about the Zodiac case. It presents only the most "accepted," "dispute-proof" evidence. In that regard, it is the polar opposite of the Graysmith books, which often contain "facts" from a large array of sources, not all of them reliable.
   
   But does that make it a good Zodiac book, one that gives us possible insight into the true identity of this most notorious killer? Ah, no. In fact, it does just the opposite. It obscures the truth, rather than attempting to shed any light on it.
   
   It's approach is classic criminal-profiler textbook murder-by-numbers. Data is compiled and analyzed, but drawing conclusions seems to be much too much of a stretch. Perhaps the authors fear reprisals. Perhaps they don't want to be wrong. For as much criticism as Graysmith has, at times, earned, he at least takes a stand and states an opinion based on what he has compiled. These guys don't take a stand on anything. If it doesn't follow their profiler recipe, they're lost.
   
   And such is the Zodiac case.... disjointed, fracutured, plagued by rumors, apparent coincidences, and theories. And never solved.
   
   Profiling may be a very effective tool for the top percentile of seriel killers, but Zodiac broke patterns in a very consistent way, even within his string of "claimable murders" in '68 and '69. When another murder or event comes close to fitting these patterns in many such cases, it's immediately dismissed by Kelleher and Van Nuys as "not fitting the pattern," yet they argue tirelessly that an incident such as the Kathleen Johns case (which many dispute the validity of) is somehow worthy of inclusion. That David Fincher took Kelleher's word for it and included it in the film version takes the story into bad made-for-TV movie hubris for the scant minutes we suffer through it.
   
   The Bates killing, where the handwriting was positively ID'd as Zodiac's, and contained numerous other similarities to the Ferrin case; The Domingo-Edwards slaying back in 1963; and even the Santa Rosa hitch-hiker murders in the early '70s contain more similarities to Z than the Johns case. Yet this is intelligent detective work? To ignore all possible clues except that which fit your own preordained rigid template based on the psychoanalysis of the Z letters' text by an author who admits that, prior to doing the analysis, that he knew NOTHING OF THE CASE WHATSOEVER!???!!!!
   
   Oh, and let's not forget that one sentence on the man many believe to be the prime suspect, the man who had reams of circumstantial evidence littered around him, who can be placed near the scenes of nearly every Zodiac crime (confirmed and speculated about) --- Leigh Allen. Yes, much of the evidence is circumstantial, but how much evidence do you ignore until you begin to cast some serious, reasonable doubts?
   
   A truly intelligent sociopath, while rare, can sometimes outsmart the police, at times merely by playing to their own weaknesses. And the profilers, like Kelleher and Van Nuys, fit the description of Zodiac's dupes very well. They seem to fall back on cliches such as "let the evidence fit the suspect" so often that they end up drowning in their own paralysis. One approach does not a well-rounded investigation make, whether you are dealing in psychiatry or criminology. Would you go to a doctor who only diagnosed you based on physical symptoms?
   
   If nothing else, these near-sighted investigators have an iron clad alibi on why the case was never solved. Their approach provides them with the ultimate excuse for their own inepititude. After all, it's easy to do a job you never have to finish.



5. "This is the Zodiac speaking" is an investigation into the Zodiac killings.
   What makes this book interesting is the psychological analysis by Mr. Van Nuys,chair of the Psychology Dept. at Sonoma state University.
   
   A quote from page 6 lays out the objective of the book- "We will begin this fascinating journey with facts-solid irrefutable facts and nothing more."
   With that in mind,the authors avoid speculating on the personal identity of the Zodiac killer.
   
   The authors explain the differences in the Riverside and Zodiac letters. They make a compelling argument for different writers based on the style of the letters with a different emphasis. By that reasoning,the man who murdered Cheri Jo Bates was not the Zodiac.
   
   The Santa Rosa hitchhiker murders were examined for possible links to the Zodiac. They seem to be un-related on various levels.
   
   It's obvious from the aftermath of the Stine murder that luck played no small part in the Zodiac avoiding discovery and arrest. You get the sense that he never recovered from his close call with the SFPD immediately following the cab driver's murder.
   
   "Overall,it appears that Zodiac was deteriorating psychologically and had now relegated himself to engaging in a strange fantasy dance with the media."-page 140.
   
   The British language connection was intriguing. Although witnesses state that he had no accent,one has to wonder where that connection came from. Were one of his parents of British origin?
   
   The change in tone in some of the letters,notably three from 1974,was examined. This "denoted a change in Zodiac's psyche that probably related to his ongoing and significant psychological disorder." He may very well have had two personalities. Another interesting theory has the change in tone as a positive result of therapy or medication.
   
   This book doesn't solve the Zodiac killings,but it does shed light on the psychology and evolution of the killer.
   After reading this book I have to wonder if Zodiac didn't succomb to suicide or by some means become more psychologically stable?
   We may never know the answer. I recommend this book as a clear,sensible investigation of the Zodiac murders.

3 comments about Labyrinth13: True Tales of the Occult, Crime & Conspiracy.

1. A fun read and was written and researched well.
   
   I bought this book mainly to read the chapters about the Manson and Son of Sam connections to the Process cult and for the chapter on the Zodiac killer, but found that I also enjoyed the rest of it. (There is one story in particular related to the Manson case about how the hippie image was tarnished by the Manson family crimes and other murders by people on LSD).
   
   Also good chapters about mind control and the death of Kurt Cobain.



2. I had a blast reading through Labyrinth 13, picking and choosing on any given night which spooky or strange phenomena I wanted to immerse myself in. The facts are presented without too much bias or conjecture, allowing the reader to ruminate on all possible explanations behind the mysterious stories. Read at night by candlelight!



3. The sheer collection of interesting tales and their variance makes for a five star publication.One has howling Dogs that are ghosts,and the Zodiac Killer.Darlene Ferrin was one of his victims.Let's keep that name alive anD the names of other vicTims.

No comments about Zodiac Killer - Deciphering a Serial Killer (Biography).

5 comments about Zodiac Unmasked: The Identity of America's Most Elusive Serial Killer Revealed.

1. This is an awful book is myriad ways, but I'll try to mention the very worst aspects. Graysmith's style was choppy and very hard to follow. he frequently refers to events with no context at all and in random order - unless you have committed the entire Zodiac case to memory (and he seems to assume everyone has), you will be as lost as I was. The direct quotes are often difficult to make sense of, as is of course typical when quotes are taken out of full conversations, but a good writer provides elaborating text; Graysmith never bothers. The date format Graysmith imposes is probably intended to give some kind of structure to what really seems to be a bunch of random notes, but it doesn't work at all as he still jumps forward and backward in time and the dates don't seem to be related to anything in particular.
   
   Graysmith's case for Allen as the Zodiac seems no more compelling than the cases for other suspects, and the fact that there was no DNA match, no fingerprint match, and no handwriting match make it clear his whole theory is pure speculation. If Allen hadn't been a pedophile you'd feel sorry for the guy. Whe middle of the book contains constant references to Graysmith's book "Zodiac" and how it was used as a "bible" by police, whom he states bought enormous numbers of copies to learn from, and how "Zodiac" was so wonderfully helpful to a wide variety of people. He also makes several statements such as "had there ever been a greater mystery?" and calls the unresolved hunt for Zodiac "one of the greatest mysteries of all time." Is he kidding? My only remembrance of the Zodiac was because of some old Clint Eastwood movie. If I were to rank eternal mysteries, Zodiac wouldn't even make the list. Graysmith seems to be so obsessed with this topic that he thinks the whole world revolves around it. Move on already.



2. Author too long winded. I love true crime, but this book just couldn't hold my attention.



3. I enjoyed both Graysmith/Zodiac books, but ZODIAC UNMASKED was 100 PAGES TOO LONG. Plus much of the info was repeated 2-4 times. I was almost expecting a test at the end!



4. After seeing David Fincher's film ZODIAC I got a craving to find out more about the crimes Zodiac committed, so I ordered a copy of Zodiac Unmasked, seeing as how the screenwriters adapted this book into the script. All I can say now is, the screenwriters must be geniuses for I have never read so disorganized and badly written a true crime book and I've plowed through some doozies in my lifetime. If you've seen the movie, you've seen Jake Gyllenhaal playing Robert Graysmith, this inoffensive, innocuous mousy cartoonist who hangs out all day at the Chronicle newsroom and little by little he becomes obsessed with the case to the detriment of his home life.
   
   It's not that cartoonists can't write good books, but I wonder how good a cartoonist Graysmith was because as a writer, he's the bottom of the barrel. Not one sentence he writes make sense. Okay, some make sense but then the problem is that whatever interest you had at the beginning of the sentence evaporates by the time he gets to the end. Part of the problem is the hugeness of his topic. Not only are there literally hundreds of suspects, very few of whom ever come alive as "characters," but there are hundreds of cops, ditto, and witnesses, ditto, all of them a huge blur, and there also seem to be hundreds of Northern California towns all of which Zodiac knew well and left terror there.
   
   We can never get an estimate of how many crimes Zodiac committed nor how many letters he wrote. Graysmith doesn't want to say "no" to any possibility, so all of them are left flapping in the wind like the monkey's gumballs.
   
   And yet another part of the problem is that, halfway through the events he relates, he makes the central one the publication of his first book about Zodiac, in which he identified his main suspect under a pseudonym (the man was still alive at that time), so we get hundreds of new sightings based on readers who read #1, called up Graysmith, told him they knew who he was talking about, and he was right, that man is strange. Maybe the first book was better for it wouldn't have all this patting himself on the back in it. This one is nigh unreadable. However since it was the basis for one of the best thrillers I've ever seen, I'm bumping it up a notch or two.



5. I'm shocked by the reviewers who read this and didn't think Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac. It reaches a point where an unbelievable number of coincidences, and identifications from witnesses and victims are too compelling to consider otherwise.
   
   Yes, Leigh's fingertips didn't match. Yes, his handwriting didn't match. Yes, they never found a "smoking gun." Leigh was an intelligent person who took considerable precautions to ensure he wouldn't get caught. Plus, there is no proof the fingerprints in question were from the Zodiac. They could have come from a number of different people (they did not get elimination prints from everyone at the scene).
   
   As for peoople who didn't like the way the book was written, keep it mind this is not a mystery novel. Events were written in chronological order and often required additional information so the reader would understand.
   
   I agree that some material is repeated and could have done without some of it myself. If you're interested at all in this case, the overwhelming amount of research and information is worth such a minor flaw.

5 comments about Zodiac.

1. Well-written book, excellent research. Disturbing that several police departments were unable to solve the case and unwilling to share information to help bring down the killer. Disturbing that Californians apparently didn't demand better police work. Sad that Mr. Graysmith worked night and day looking for a killer while tax-paid police feigned interest but didn't join in. Sad that the SF's lead investigator blames others when he loses his job even though it was nine years and counting at that point with no one behind bars. How is it investigators get only one search warrant for a suspect with several homes? A sad and disturbing story all around.



2. After watching the movie twice & reading the first couple of chapters of the book, I offer the following observations. First, there is a lot of detail. One gets the sense that Graysmith put in every scrap of information he had (whether or not it was truly relevant). As an example, I offer below the list of characters introduced in Chapter Two alone. Second, his writing style is neither here nor there. It doesn't read like a fictional account of the same subject yet it is more than a summary of known facts in the case. If it were not a real case, I would not continue reading as the storyline is overcrowded with seemingly unimportant data. However, it's this same jumble of information that gives the reader a sense of what it must have been like for the detectives working the case.
   
   1. Darlene Ferrin: shooting victim
   2. Bobbie Ramos: Darlene's co-worker at Terry's Restaurant
   3. Dean Ferrin: Darlene's current (second) husband
   4. Dena Ferrin: Darlene & Dean's baby daughter
   5. Bill & Carmela Leigh: Ferrins' landlords; Dean's bosses at Caesar's Palace Italian Restaurant
   6. Karen: Darlene's 17 year old babysitter
   7. Pam Suennen: Darlene's younger sister
   8. Jim "Phillips" (assumed last name): Darlene's ex-husband
   9. Bobbie Oxnam: previous co-worker of Darlene at San Francisco phone company
   10. Leo Suennen: Darlene's younger brother
   11. Mike Mageau: shooting victim; close friend of Darlene's
   12. David Mageau: Mike's twin brother; also a close friend of Darlene's
   13. Jay Eisen, Ron Allen, Rick Crabtree & Sydne: friends who attended Darlene's painting party
   14. Richard Hoffman, Steve Baldino & Howard "Buzz" Gordon: police officers who attended Darlene's painting party
   15. "Paul" the bartender (not real name): "creepy" attendee of the painting party; later a prime suspect in the murders
   16. Linda Del Buono: Darlene's other sister
   17. Leo: Linda (& presumably Darlene's ) father
   18. Christina: Darlene's 15 year old sister
   19. John Lynch: Detective Sergeant with Vallejo police
   20. Harley Scalley: manager at Terry's Restaurant
   21: Jane Rhodes: Darlene's acquaintance at Terry's Restaurant
   22. Janet Lynne: Darlene's second babysitter
   23. Pamela: Janet Lynne's friend
   24. George Bryant: Blue Rock Springs Golf Course caretaker
   25. Debra, Roger & Jerry: teens who came across the victims following the shooting
   26. Nancy Slover: Vallejo P.D. switchboard operator
   27. Ed Rust: Sergeant with Vallejo P.D.; John Lynch's partner
   28. Richard Hoffman & Sergeant Conway: Vallejo P.D. at the crime scene
   29. Arthur Ferrin: Dean's father
   30. Officer Shrum & his partner: Vallejo P.D. sent to notify Mageau family of shooting
   31. Evelyn Olson: Darlene's co-worker at Terry's Restaurant
   32. Lois Mckee: cook at Terry's Restaurant
   33. Carmen: Mike Mageau's mother
   34. Detective Sergeant Bidou: Benicia P.D.
   35. Jack Mulanax: Vallejo P.D. who inherited Ferrin case from Lynch



3. This extremely long-winded version of the Zodiac Killer investigation, as portrayed by political cartoonist Robert Graysmith, is full of detail; unfortunately, it has been saturated with detail that serves no purpose other to fill pages.
   
   Graysmith, an apparent wanna-be cop, takes on the role of a "private investigator" and attempts to gather "evidence" on his favorite Zodiac suspect, Arthur Allen Leigh. However, readers are given some insight into other possible suspects while others that police favored are not mentioned at all.
   
   While this book is filled with reproductions of Zodiac's letters, etc., readers are not invited to envision the victims as no photos of these individuals are included. I was only able to gain an image by Googling for information on the Zodiac Killer.
   
   If one can weed through the usless dribble, there is an excellent story within; however, one most remember that this book was written based mainly on the author's opinion. And, to be quite frank, the opinion of a political cartoonist is not the first I'm looking to take; but readers can leave that up to their own judgment.



4. I liked the movie a lot but wanted to know more - now I fear I know too much. It is an interesting painfully detailed account of the Zodiac murders.



5. Incredibly detailed story with tons of factual information. Graysmith does an excellent job of displaying the facts of the Zodiac case along with his own opinions. Some questions, however, are left unanswered, which is frustrating, but that is because the case will probably never be solved completely. One of the biggest unanswered questions for me was why were the authorities never able to track down Kathleen Johns; she was the only surviving victim that spent a significant amount of time with the Zodiac. She was the only victim to actually see and hear zodiac and live.
   
   Graysmith's story is very similar to the movie however, there are a few details to the case that were left out and have a good amount of meaning relating to the case. Overall, it is a good read and will leave you wanting more.