February 4, 2026 • 31 mins
An update on the investigation. Part 1 of the discussion amongst the investigators answering questions from listeners. Learn more on KillerInTheCode.com.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
This is Michael Connelly and you're listening to Killer in
the Code Solving the Black Dalia and Zodiac cases. Today,
we're going to follow our first six episodes with a
roundtable discussion with the principal investigators on this these cases
and answer questions that have come into our podcast website,
(00:24):
which is Killerinnecode dot Com. With me today is Alex Baber,
who started this whole thing when he cracked the Z
thirteen code left behind by the Zodiac Killer fifty some
years ago. And veteran homicide investigators Mitsi Roberts, who at
one time before her retirement, ran the cold case unit
(00:47):
for the Los Angeles Police Department of which the Black
Dallia case was assigned. It was her case for about
fifteen sixteen years. And another cold case detective, Rick Jackson,
who is veteran of the LAPD homicide squads, including the
cold case squad, and now works as a cold case
investigator for the San Mateo County share u's office up
(01:10):
in northern California. So welcome everybody, and we know we
have limited time here, so we're going to start going
through the questions and see how many we can get answered.
So let's start with this first one. This one is
very germane to what we've been trying to do. But
probably the question we're getting the most to our website
(01:32):
is this, Have any law enforcement organizations contacted you about
the podcast? We've gathered a lot of circumstantial evidence and
even some physical evidence, and I think it's a good question,
what's going to happen with all this or is it
just going to end up in a podcast? Rick, you
want to start with that one.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Sure, in reality, we have no control over where this
goes once we make notifications and communicate with law enforcement.
I have talked to a detective from LAPD who has
been assigned to look into it. To what degree, I
don't know. They've made it known that they're not going
to provide us with information. They are taking information for
(02:17):
us to team what is necessary to fall upon and
make determination whether this is a viable suspect or not.
I've also talked with the San Francisco Police Department to
the detective that is technically assigned to the Zodiac case
that occurred in San Francisco, and basically it was the
(02:37):
same thing. They are moving their investigation as they feel
is appropriate. Again, not sharing with us what they are doing,
which is understandable from you know, we're no longer sworn
law enforcement officers working under jurisdiction of any place that
has the jurisdiction over these cases, so we shouldn't be
(03:00):
given information. So again it's outside of our control. But
I do think they will look at it and make
up determination. I think they're sufficient evidence for them to
look at these cases and move forward to the extent
where they can either definitely include him as the suspect,
it can eliminate him if that's what it shows, which
(03:22):
I don't think will happen, or just combine it with
all the other theories and not make a determination on
any of them.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
Anybody want to add anything. I like that the fact
that I was.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
The first individual in decades to be requested to show
in NAPA or any jurisdiction in North Bay to do
a presentation with San Francisco PD, Solano County Sheriff's Department,
as well as representatives of NAPA Sheriff's Department or office,
and FBI for me to be requested to fly from
(04:00):
the East Coast to California to do a presentation between
four of the five involved jurisdictions from the original case
makes a statement in itself.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
Yeah, And I'd just like to add that the fact
that you're not hearing a lot about law enforcement being involved.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
Hearing from the law enforcement side is just the nature
of this case.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Like I've said many times when I've had it, it's
an ancillary case.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
Their main duties are more current homicides and cold cases.
Speaker 4 (04:36):
And so just because we're not hearing anything from law
enforcement doesn't mean that they're not looking into it and
investigating the evidence that we've given to them and the
evidence that's in the podcast.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
I should also add that they have asked for contact
information from certain people that are pertinent people in the
case as we explain to them the particulars of our investigation.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
And I will add a reminder here the suspect Alex
has identified died in nineteen ninety three. So while all
these law enforcement agencies would like to solve these crimes
and say case closed, they are duty bound to pursue
cases where there are viable suspects out there, you know,
live killers who need to be brought to justice. With
(05:28):
this case and this suspect, that is not going to
happen as sad and disappointing as that is. So that
puts this investigation on a level of being worked when
it can be worked, and when you consider a big
city like Los Angeles, when is there not a new
case to be worked and a killer out there somewhere
on the loose. Okay, let's move on. We hope that
(05:54):
you've already listened to the first six episodes of this podcast.
But just very brief Alex broke z thirteen. It's also
known as my Name Is. It's where the Zodiac claimed
he had put his name into a cipher And the
name Alex came up with and which has been verified
(06:14):
by some of the top cryptographers in the world, was
Marvin Merrill. Further investigation revealed that was an alias for
a man named Marvin Margolis, who was one of the
prime suspects in the Black Dahia case. And that's how
we we linked these cases. And a question that has
come in largely because of internet chatter. I don't know
(06:38):
what else to call it, where people said no Margolis
was cleared by the LAPD way back in nineteen forty seven,
the year of the Black Dahia murder. By the way,
Black Dahlia is the moniker. I guess you call it
for Elizabeth Short the victim, and so let's have that
question answered here, hopefully and for all. Was Margo Is
(07:02):
cleared or not by the LAPD MIXI you had this
case for a while, You're probably more familiar with it
than anybody possibly in the world. What's your answer to
that question?
Speaker 4 (07:15):
Not to my satisfaction, and the there's just a lot
of conflicting information, a lot of well because of this,
he was cleared, because of his alibi that his wife supported,
he was cleared, But the timeline just doesn't it doesn't
make sense to me with the evidence, with the grand jury,
(07:36):
with the LAPD still looking for him after the grand jury,
because the lead investigator had said that he couldn't clear him,
nor could he include him.
Speaker 5 (07:47):
And that's just more evidence to me of what an.
Speaker 4 (07:50):
Elusive type of suspect Marvin Margolis was and that they
just there's not enough information that they have or the
acts to him to make that determination.
Speaker 5 (08:02):
The benefit that I have with maybe a.
Speaker 4 (08:05):
Handful of individuals is I had access to the files
for fifteen years, and I've scoured through those files, not
just the DA files, but the entire Black Value files,
as well as all the stuff that's out on the
Internet that I have access to. And all I can
say is, I'm not satisfied that he is cleared.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
And even if you.
Speaker 4 (08:27):
Take all of that into consideration and you say yes,
the investigators in the you know, in the late forties
cleared him.
Speaker 5 (08:34):
He had an alibi and they cleared him.
Speaker 4 (08:38):
I've worked many cases where people lie, people live for people.
You're not really one hundred percent able to verify the alibi,
and so they take him for his word and they
move on to the next because that happened a lot
in this case. Take somebody's you know, check them out
the list, and move to the next. And it's kind
of what is so fascinating about these cases all these
(09:01):
years later is that suspects like Leslie, Dillon and Hodell,
all these suspects that keep coming out at one point
were somewhat cleared or had alibised or but they're still there.
They're still in the files, and there's still, at least
for the Internet solution and stuff that everybody has a
(09:23):
theory of.
Speaker 5 (09:24):
Who it could be and why they weren't cleared sufficiently.
And that's the nature of the beasts of this case.
Speaker 4 (09:33):
All I can say is I've had access to the
files for fifteen years, all of the files, and I'm
not convinced that Marvin Merrill was cleared.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
And I will add on to that. And Mitzi briefly
referred to one of the lead detectives, but Finest Brown
was a Homicide Division detective, a veteran detective, and he
was one of the two leads on the Black Dalua
case and in the grand jury in the nineteen fifty
time period. He definitively said, as Mitzi referenced that he
(10:10):
can include him because there was insufficient evidence to move
forward at that time. But he definitely was not eliminated
as a suspect. And there are other people that were
associated with the investigation from either LAPD or the DA's
office that said he always remained there that person's key
(10:33):
focus from early on because of their person relationship, he
should have been a major target of the investigation, not
just one of twenty one. I mean, he was the
one that had a relationship with or lived with her.
And we all know, you know the percentage of times
that relationships or people known to the other person are
(10:56):
the killer and the victim. It's just the way it
goes those to be eliminated. And he definitely wasn't eliminated
by the detectives then.
Speaker 5 (11:04):
Yes, And he when he was initially interviewed, he lied.
He lied to the detectives, which they kind of gave
him a pass on that, and I think it was
a I think it was a soft pass. I think
that you have to take that more into consideration and
to say, well, if he's lying.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
About this, what else is he lying about? And who
else maybe be a part of that? And so for
all those reasons, I don't think that he.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
Was eliminated back then and can be eliminated now.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
And we all know alibi is given by people close
to somebody, specifically a wife, a new wife has to
be looked at with very close eyes to see if
that's a legitimate other than just her word. There's nothing
else other than her word that's got to be looked at.
(11:59):
And I've handled cases one recently where I work now,
where the eventual suspect was eliminated based on things that
happened within days of the murder, and thirty something years later,
we began looking at it and I just could not
get past the fact that this is too good of
(12:21):
a suspect, not only in her visual appearance and the
likeness to the composite, but in a very unique car
that she had access to, and eventually, thirty five years later,
she was definitively identified as a suspect, not only through
a confession but some of her general writings that she
had done about shooting the victim.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
It happens all the time, Alex. You want to say something, Yeah,
I want.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
To put a cherry on top of her. Guys, there's
this myth of a missing week. If that's true, then
we can eliminate more than Markles as a suspect based
on his school attendance and his employment at that time.
He's given to alibis by dream mate Bill Robinson that
he lives with and new Elizabeth Short as well as
his wife will be married approximately a month after Elizabeth
Short Lefting that being said, we do also know that
(13:11):
Alficher McBride had an account of Elizabeth Short coming to
her for protection within hours of her murder, and it's
verified that she confirmed Elizabeth Short's body, not photographs her
body as being that of the woman that she spoke to.
So this surpasses the belief that she saw photographs. A
few hours later came back and said, look, now I'm
dubious about my original account. It might be somebody different.
(13:34):
Because once you go down and you view the body
and you confirm that that's etchton Stone. So then you
move forward to the granaduriy inquest and you have one
suspect and one suspect only that they tried to track
down outside of California, and that's Marvin Margolis in Chicago.
We have accounts of letters where they reach out to
Chicago pet repeatedly. They send him out to his in
law's house. There's residents. They're trying to hunt this guy down.
(13:56):
Nobody else of the suspects was ever printed down in
that manner. Ever, in the closing statement guys, the very
last document under oath DA or deput DA, Vick says,
if we allow Marvin Margolis to know outside of these
four walls that were attempting to locate him, he may
elude justice forever. So that right there is a statement
(14:18):
in himself as well.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Yeah, I find that very at the very end of
the grand jury, that kind of instruction. Basically, then nothing
leaves these four walls about this guy is very telling.
And there's another thing I just want to throw in.
I just finished reading a book called Black Dalle It
just came out by an author named William Mann, and
(14:43):
he also calls Margolis the last man standing in terms
he methodically knocks down all the other suspects and says
Margolis is the last man standing. And one of the
things he says, which I don't think we've come across,
or Alex maybe you can confirm, is that the LAPD
never pulled his military records. It was the grand jury
(15:04):
that did. And so when they cleared them, they didn't
know anything about him getting a fifty percent reduced capacity
situation with him. They didn't know anything about the psychology
the psychologists who interviewed him and talked about his aggression
and his mindset. And you know, if I think at
(15:26):
Finnis Brown and his partner knew this stuff, they would
have never cleared him in any way because this guy
just he fit that profile right off the bat.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
May add to that real quick, Michael. Also, and everything
is when they didn't pull his notary record, they didn't
realize that he was attached to Marine Division as a
naval Coreman, and we know that they were looking for
marine in particular following her murder, and he lies and
in the files he claims to be in the Army,
not the Navy, not the Marine Corps, in the Army.
(16:02):
That's in the report, but that is often overlooked when
people do their investigation.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
Okay, by the way, I'm going to talk to William
Mann about his book and his investigation later down the
line in our podcast.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
And I also want to mention that when we first
heard about Man's book coming out towards the latter part
of twenty twenty five, showed that he had paid Margolis
as the likely suspect or as the suspect, and as
had Alex in his investigative work. So the fact that
(16:40):
these two people, Man and Baber, had no connection to
each other, didn't know what the other was doing, and
they both came to the same conclusion with well researched
information kind of supports the fact that even beyond those
two people's investigations, that he is likely the suspect. And
(17:03):
that's let alone all the information that we've recovered that
is great circumstantial evidence linking Merril Margolis.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
I just kind of want to add to that, it's
it's funny that people are so sort of fast to
push that narrative that he was cleared during the initial investigation,
which means that all of this information that Alex has
come up with today and that we verified with world
(17:34):
renowned experts, we're just supposed to ignore because he was
eliminated back in.
Speaker 5 (17:43):
Nineteen forty seven.
Speaker 4 (17:44):
And that just doesn't make sense as an investigator that
you would ignore compelling evidence on an elimination that we
really can't improve.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
This is kind of related, so sticking with the black
value here, especially you two homicide detectives, your view of
this and I, MITCHI, I know you've like looked through
the four drawers of the cabinet and we've all seen
the FBI files and the Grand Jewty flowles. What is
your view of this investigation? And obviously things are different now,
(18:19):
technology is way ahead of time and so forth. But
there's this lure out there that this was a state
of the art investigation. And I think if it was,
you know, the police chief would not have called for
a grand jury to refocus the case. I think if
it was, they might have at least charged somebody, But
(18:41):
no one was ever charged. No one was ever convicted
of this crime. What is there a way to reach
back almost eighty years and say this was a solid investigation.
I know it deals with some detectives who are pretty famous,
But I, as someone who's not a detective and who
(19:02):
is complete amateur and probably doesn't know what I'm talking about,
I see the string of things that were missed and
ultimately led to the grand jury kind of taking over
this case.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
What I can say about that is that, yes, the
detectives at the time have very good reputations as smart, dedicated,
hard working detectives. There is an abundance of investigative material.
There's no doubt that there was heart and that there
was just heart and soul, and they put everything into
(19:39):
this investigation. But knowing how cases like this kind of
get away from an investigator, you're never prepared in a
case like this that it's a gruesome case and you're
going to go in with it and give it all
your investigators and give it everything that you have. But
(20:00):
you're never prepared for the media to pick up on
a case like this and just take it and run.
And that's when a case like this can get away
from you. And you're so busy and the department is
so busy chasing down now leads from crank jobs and
(20:20):
nuts and legitimate people and at the same time trying
to just work the case that it can get away
from you quickly and things there can be shortcuts made,
or things can just get dropped because if anything, and
just by reading and go and having access to those files,
(20:41):
I can tell you that it would now if we
had a murder like that, it would be worked completely different.
It would be a ginormous task where so there would
be the entire division in Robert Homicide would be would
be given some role in that investigation, and it would
be worked until it was so And I can tell
(21:02):
you that that didn't happen back then. You know, there
were a handful of detectives on it, and they pushed
the case for initially for you know, and then it
kind of just whittled down to the main investigators assigned
to the case. And so although I can't fault their investigation,
because I do think they worked very diligently and hard, it.
Speaker 5 (21:27):
Seems to me that.
Speaker 4 (21:30):
Just the immense amount of attention from the media outside
from the public, that this case got away from them.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
And what I'll say about it is, you know, the
new chief of police came in William Wharton in nineteen
forty nine, and I can guarantee you, other than just
looking at the overall overall operation of the police department
as a new chief, one of the first things he
was going to do would want to do is get
(22:00):
a briefing on this case that had massive public interest,
a lot of people working on it.
Speaker 4 (22:06):
UH.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
And obviously what he heard he did not like, because
there is a whole news article about him saying that
he felt it was a bungled investigation and it needed
a new start, and he was the one that initiated
the call to start a grand jury and kind of
start from scratch and move forward through the through the
(22:31):
evidence and through the UH the investigative steps that had
already been taken, and maybe send it in a new direction.
So obviously he wasn't happy with it for whatever reason.
But he did in fact call it a quote unquote
bungled investigation, So that's that's key.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
I just wanted to mention that that some of these
documents that we're talking about, they'll they'll be available on
killeringnecode dot com. I just want to add too.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
Whenever the grand injury closed out, Detective Frank P. Jamison
for the DA's office, his last comment on his report,
his personal report was that he advised the incoming grand
jury to pick up the case again because he felt
that they were close to identifying and getting some justice
(23:19):
for Elizabeth Short and in the local newspaper articles, he
actually dav is quoted as stating that the original investigation
was subpar by his standards, as well as the other investigators.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
By the way, I'm not giving the names of the
people who sending these questions because we got many that
are the same, so I'd have to give a whole
list of names. So sorry about that if you're not
getting credit for your question. But here's a one word
for word that came in. Can you please address the
elephant in the room that many on the internet are
(23:55):
firmly convinced Arthur Lee Allen was the zodiacc Alex warning
to take that one all right.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
So from the moment the movie was released in two
thousand and seven, I remember the talk show, one of
the leading talk shows, bringing in Jake Gildenhall as well
as the individual that played Tashie on screen, which is
Mark Bruffalo, And they said, are the audience is gonna
be pissed when they leave the theater, that they're gonna
believe that Arthur Lee Allen's is Zodiac even though he's not.
(24:25):
And this interview is on YouTube if you get a
chance to watch it, and they both chuckle a little
bit and they're like, we assume. So with that being said,
the movie two thousand and seven was based on Robert
Graysmith's book that was released initially nineteen eighty six, revised
and released in twenty eleven twenty twelve, and it points
to Arthur Lee Allen, it's about as much fiction as
it is nonfiction, to be honest with you. And that
(24:47):
being said, to get down to the legal aspect of this,
Mark Lee Allen was cleared by three of the top
five forensic categories, that being handwriting which is the least
my opinion, fingerprints, and then DNA, So three of the
top five you you know, eliminate biometrics as being the
(25:08):
other one as well as audio. This tells you right
there that you got a guy that if I'm going
to wager on, I'm not wagering on him as being
the SDIAC.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
What is the source of the DNA.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
DNA they used was extracted from the stamps little of
this letter from two thousand and four. They attempted to
extract more DNA in twenty eighteen. Supposedly there's this individual
behind the scenes whistleblower that said they were unable to
distract in the DNA at all in twenty eighteen, so
they revert back to the partial DNA extraction. And it
is only partial, mind you, but they were able to
(25:42):
eliminate him as well as all other suspects to date.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Rick, were you going to say something?
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Yeah, And I have been told by someone that had
control of the Zodiac case with the San Francisco Police
Department from for years and that that person told me
that Arthur Lee Allen, his connection has is bullshits thet
(26:08):
the quote he used, and that he has been officially eliminated.
Speaker 1 (26:15):
So repeat itself.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Yeah, Yeah, that's all I can say on that, And
that's coming from somebody that's in the know of the
Zodiac San Francisco case. There was also a potential, and
I've never been able to confirm this, that there was
some potential DNA extracted from a glove that was left
at the crime scene inadvertently by the killer of Paul Stein,
(26:40):
the cab driver.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
There's a question surrounding night glove. Just for the record,
I'm not sure if it was left by a prior
affair or if it actually belongs to the perpetrator beating
the zodiac. It was found in the front floorboard. It
was it was Dunstan blood, guys, because you had Paul
Stein's blood that was it filled the floorboard panel if
you look at the photograph. So they're unsure the origin
of that as well, but there isn't a DNA that's
(27:04):
been extracted from that.
Speaker 1 (27:05):
You are correct. This is the perfect time to bring
up handwriting analysis since you mentioned that Arthur Lee Allen
was partially one of the clearances was on handwriting comparison.
That was very important to your investigation, Alex, because it
was like pursuing handwriting examples from Marvin Margolas Slash, Marvin
(27:26):
Merrill slash, many other names that you met with his
son to get handwriting examples, and of course you got
the sketch which is at the center of our investigation.
But whatever, what's the latest or where are we on
handwriting analysis on this case?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Okay, So we have one confirmation that we had in
our back pocket and we started this and we had
one received last nighte from any Great Forensic Services who's
also confirmed aid that he can't eliminate more Margolis as
the author of any of the letters, including the Zodiac
or Black Dalua. The reason being is because there's capital
(28:05):
box letters that are not personal in description, as well
as lowercase incursive that we supplied him with. But he
also said that there was evidence suggesting that Marvin Margoles
was the author of the Zodiac letters. So we have
a win win situation. We have not one but two
experts independently confirming, one be on the side of a
(28:27):
doubt his opinion, the other one saying that he can't
be eliminated and that he is in most likelihood the
author of the zodiac letters.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Okay, and I just want to also add, and obviously
I am not an expert and Mitzi is not an
expert in handwriting, but we both handled cases we're handwriting,
and so we spent time with question document examiners with
LAPD who handle hundreds and hundreds of these cases a year,
and so you pick up some things just from live
(28:56):
listening to them and they're now learning about their analysis
on our cases. And just for me looking at some
of the letters, I'm not saying all of them, but
some of the letters are so unique that I just
my gut feeling as wow, this is pretty strong stuff. Again,
I'm not a court qualified expert, but using common sense
(29:19):
and the stuff we've learned from question document Zamer's, I
would say it looks pretty good, and especially in some
of the cursive lower case cursive things.
Speaker 3 (29:31):
I believe that the general public would have to agree
with this guy. So I don't think I've read one
comment that's negative about the handwriting similarities.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Well, we'll put some of those up on the website
as well, where you can see the comparison and also
correct me if I'm wrong or actually say this better
than me Alex. But in the world of handwriting analysis,
if you see one thing that doesn't match, you have
(30:01):
to eliminate. And so when our latest review or analysis
comes back and says that Margola slash Merrill cannot be eliminated,
that means they saw nothing that doesn't match. I'm saying
this wrong, but I'm saying it's a very high standard.
Speaker 3 (30:19):
Correct, You're correct, Michael, if they see one indication or
a red flag, at that point, they have to acknowledge that,
meaning that they have to state that this individual either
there's any probability that he's not the author or that
he isn't the author.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
Okay, And we had none of that, and either of
our do analysis made by separate company, separate people. They
probably know each other because it's a small group, I think.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
But they didn't actually know each other because I didn't
make it aware to them when we requested that we
get their independent analysis. I didn't want them to be
aware one another. I wanted them to come back and
see if they came to the same conclusion, which they
both did.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
This is running longer than I thought and planned, so
we're going to actually break this into two parts, and
so we'll be back. You can take a break now.
I'm talking to our listeners, not you three, but we're
going to end this one this podcast, and there'll be
a part two. I'm Michael Connolly, and you've been listening
(31:22):
to Killer in the Code Solving the Black Dahlia and
Zodiac cases. That concludes the first half of our roundtable discussion,
where we take in questions from the listening audience. If
you've enjoyed it, check out chapter eight, where we continue
the discussion. Thank you for listening.
This is Michael Connelly and you're listening to Killer in
the Code Solving the Black Dalia and Zodiac cases. Today,
we're going to follow our first six episodes with a
roundtable discussion with the principal investigators on this these cases
and answer questions that have come into our podcast website,
(00:24):
which is Killerinnecode dot Com. With me today is Alex Baber,
who started this whole thing when he cracked the Z
thirteen code left behind by the Zodiac Killer fifty some
years ago. And veteran homicide investigators Mitsi Roberts, who at
one time before her retirement, ran the cold case unit
(00:47):
for the Los Angeles Police Department of which the Black
Dallia case was assigned. It was her case for about
fifteen sixteen years. And another cold case detective, Rick Jackson,
who is veteran of the LAPD homicide squads, including the
cold case squad, and now works as a cold case
investigator for the San Mateo County share u's office up
(01:10):
in northern California. So welcome everybody, and we know we
have limited time here, so we're going to start going
through the questions and see how many we can get answered.
So let's start with this first one. This one is
very germane to what we've been trying to do. But
probably the question we're getting the most to our website
(01:32):
is this, Have any law enforcement organizations contacted you about
the podcast? We've gathered a lot of circumstantial evidence and
even some physical evidence, and I think it's a good question,
what's going to happen with all this or is it
just going to end up in a podcast? Rick, you
want to start with that one.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Sure, in reality, we have no control over where this
goes once we make notifications and communicate with law enforcement.
I have talked to a detective from LAPD who has
been assigned to look into it. To what degree, I
don't know. They've made it known that they're not going
to provide us with information. They are taking information for
(02:17):
us to team what is necessary to fall upon and
make determination whether this is a viable suspect or not.
I've also talked with the San Francisco Police Department to
the detective that is technically assigned to the Zodiac case
that occurred in San Francisco, and basically it was the
(02:37):
same thing. They are moving their investigation as they feel
is appropriate. Again, not sharing with us what they are doing,
which is understandable from you know, we're no longer sworn
law enforcement officers working under jurisdiction of any place that
has the jurisdiction over these cases, so we shouldn't be
(03:00):
given information. So again it's outside of our control. But
I do think they will look at it and make
up determination. I think they're sufficient evidence for them to
look at these cases and move forward to the extent
where they can either definitely include him as the suspect,
it can eliminate him if that's what it shows, which
(03:22):
I don't think will happen, or just combine it with
all the other theories and not make a determination on
any of them.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
Anybody want to add anything. I like that the fact
that I was.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
The first individual in decades to be requested to show
in NAPA or any jurisdiction in North Bay to do
a presentation with San Francisco PD, Solano County Sheriff's Department,
as well as representatives of NAPA Sheriff's Department or office,
and FBI for me to be requested to fly from
(04:00):
the East Coast to California to do a presentation between
four of the five involved jurisdictions from the original case
makes a statement in itself.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
Yeah, And I'd just like to add that the fact
that you're not hearing a lot about law enforcement being involved.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
Hearing from the law enforcement side is just the nature
of this case.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Like I've said many times when I've had it, it's
an ancillary case.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
Their main duties are more current homicides and cold cases.
Speaker 4 (04:36):
And so just because we're not hearing anything from law
enforcement doesn't mean that they're not looking into it and
investigating the evidence that we've given to them and the
evidence that's in the podcast.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
I should also add that they have asked for contact
information from certain people that are pertinent people in the
case as we explain to them the particulars of our investigation.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
And I will add a reminder here the suspect Alex
has identified died in nineteen ninety three. So while all
these law enforcement agencies would like to solve these crimes
and say case closed, they are duty bound to pursue
cases where there are viable suspects out there, you know,
live killers who need to be brought to justice. With
(05:28):
this case and this suspect, that is not going to
happen as sad and disappointing as that is. So that
puts this investigation on a level of being worked when
it can be worked, and when you consider a big
city like Los Angeles, when is there not a new
case to be worked and a killer out there somewhere
on the loose. Okay, let's move on. We hope that
(05:54):
you've already listened to the first six episodes of this podcast.
But just very brief Alex broke z thirteen. It's also
known as my Name Is. It's where the Zodiac claimed
he had put his name into a cipher And the
name Alex came up with and which has been verified
(06:14):
by some of the top cryptographers in the world, was
Marvin Merrill. Further investigation revealed that was an alias for
a man named Marvin Margolis, who was one of the
prime suspects in the Black Dahia case. And that's how
we we linked these cases. And a question that has
come in largely because of internet chatter. I don't know
(06:38):
what else to call it, where people said no Margolis
was cleared by the LAPD way back in nineteen forty seven,
the year of the Black Dahia murder. By the way,
Black Dahlia is the moniker. I guess you call it
for Elizabeth Short the victim, and so let's have that
question answered here, hopefully and for all. Was Margo Is
(07:02):
cleared or not by the LAPD MIXI you had this
case for a while, You're probably more familiar with it
than anybody possibly in the world. What's your answer to
that question?
Speaker 4 (07:15):
Not to my satisfaction, and the there's just a lot
of conflicting information, a lot of well because of this,
he was cleared, because of his alibi that his wife supported,
he was cleared, But the timeline just doesn't it doesn't
make sense to me with the evidence, with the grand jury,
(07:36):
with the LAPD still looking for him after the grand jury,
because the lead investigator had said that he couldn't clear him,
nor could he include him.
Speaker 5 (07:47):
And that's just more evidence to me of what an.
Speaker 4 (07:50):
Elusive type of suspect Marvin Margolis was and that they
just there's not enough information that they have or the
acts to him to make that determination.
Speaker 5 (08:02):
The benefit that I have with maybe a.
Speaker 4 (08:05):
Handful of individuals is I had access to the files
for fifteen years, and I've scoured through those files, not
just the DA files, but the entire Black Value files,
as well as all the stuff that's out on the
Internet that I have access to. And all I can
say is, I'm not satisfied that he is cleared.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
And even if you.
Speaker 4 (08:27):
Take all of that into consideration and you say yes,
the investigators in the you know, in the late forties
cleared him.
Speaker 5 (08:34):
He had an alibi and they cleared him.
Speaker 4 (08:38):
I've worked many cases where people lie, people live for people.
You're not really one hundred percent able to verify the alibi,
and so they take him for his word and they
move on to the next because that happened a lot
in this case. Take somebody's you know, check them out
the list, and move to the next. And it's kind
of what is so fascinating about these cases all these
(09:01):
years later is that suspects like Leslie, Dillon and Hodell,
all these suspects that keep coming out at one point
were somewhat cleared or had alibised or but they're still there.
They're still in the files, and there's still, at least
for the Internet solution and stuff that everybody has a
(09:23):
theory of.
Speaker 5 (09:24):
Who it could be and why they weren't cleared sufficiently.
And that's the nature of the beasts of this case.
Speaker 4 (09:33):
All I can say is I've had access to the
files for fifteen years, all of the files, and I'm
not convinced that Marvin Merrill was cleared.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
And I will add on to that. And Mitzi briefly
referred to one of the lead detectives, but Finest Brown
was a Homicide Division detective, a veteran detective, and he
was one of the two leads on the Black Dalua
case and in the grand jury in the nineteen fifty
time period. He definitively said, as Mitzi referenced that he
(10:10):
can include him because there was insufficient evidence to move
forward at that time. But he definitely was not eliminated
as a suspect. And there are other people that were
associated with the investigation from either LAPD or the DA's
office that said he always remained there that person's key
(10:33):
focus from early on because of their person relationship, he
should have been a major target of the investigation, not
just one of twenty one. I mean, he was the
one that had a relationship with or lived with her.
And we all know, you know the percentage of times
that relationships or people known to the other person are
(10:56):
the killer and the victim. It's just the way it
goes those to be eliminated. And he definitely wasn't eliminated
by the detectives then.
Speaker 5 (11:04):
Yes, And he when he was initially interviewed, he lied.
He lied to the detectives, which they kind of gave
him a pass on that, and I think it was
a I think it was a soft pass. I think
that you have to take that more into consideration and
to say, well, if he's lying.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
About this, what else is he lying about? And who
else maybe be a part of that? And so for
all those reasons, I don't think that he.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
Was eliminated back then and can be eliminated now.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
And we all know alibi is given by people close
to somebody, specifically a wife, a new wife has to
be looked at with very close eyes to see if
that's a legitimate other than just her word. There's nothing
else other than her word that's got to be looked at.
(11:59):
And I've handled cases one recently where I work now,
where the eventual suspect was eliminated based on things that
happened within days of the murder, and thirty something years later,
we began looking at it and I just could not
get past the fact that this is too good of
(12:21):
a suspect, not only in her visual appearance and the
likeness to the composite, but in a very unique car
that she had access to, and eventually, thirty five years later,
she was definitively identified as a suspect, not only through
a confession but some of her general writings that she
had done about shooting the victim.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
It happens all the time, Alex. You want to say something, Yeah,
I want.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
To put a cherry on top of her. Guys, there's
this myth of a missing week. If that's true, then
we can eliminate more than Markles as a suspect based
on his school attendance and his employment at that time.
He's given to alibis by dream mate Bill Robinson that
he lives with and new Elizabeth Short as well as
his wife will be married approximately a month after Elizabeth
Short Lefting that being said, we do also know that
(13:11):
Alficher McBride had an account of Elizabeth Short coming to
her for protection within hours of her murder, and it's
verified that she confirmed Elizabeth Short's body, not photographs her
body as being that of the woman that she spoke to.
So this surpasses the belief that she saw photographs. A
few hours later came back and said, look, now I'm
dubious about my original account. It might be somebody different.
(13:34):
Because once you go down and you view the body
and you confirm that that's etchton Stone. So then you
move forward to the granaduriy inquest and you have one
suspect and one suspect only that they tried to track
down outside of California, and that's Marvin Margolis in Chicago.
We have accounts of letters where they reach out to
Chicago pet repeatedly. They send him out to his in
law's house. There's residents. They're trying to hunt this guy down.
(13:56):
Nobody else of the suspects was ever printed down in
that manner. Ever, in the closing statement guys, the very
last document under oath DA or deput DA, Vick says,
if we allow Marvin Margolis to know outside of these
four walls that were attempting to locate him, he may
elude justice forever. So that right there is a statement
(14:18):
in himself as well.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Yeah, I find that very at the very end of
the grand jury, that kind of instruction. Basically, then nothing
leaves these four walls about this guy is very telling.
And there's another thing I just want to throw in.
I just finished reading a book called Black Dalle It
just came out by an author named William Mann, and
(14:43):
he also calls Margolis the last man standing in terms
he methodically knocks down all the other suspects and says
Margolis is the last man standing. And one of the
things he says, which I don't think we've come across,
or Alex maybe you can confirm, is that the LAPD
never pulled his military records. It was the grand jury
(15:04):
that did. And so when they cleared them, they didn't
know anything about him getting a fifty percent reduced capacity
situation with him. They didn't know anything about the psychology
the psychologists who interviewed him and talked about his aggression
and his mindset. And you know, if I think at
(15:26):
Finnis Brown and his partner knew this stuff, they would
have never cleared him in any way because this guy
just he fit that profile right off the bat.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
May add to that real quick, Michael. Also, and everything
is when they didn't pull his notary record, they didn't
realize that he was attached to Marine Division as a
naval Coreman, and we know that they were looking for
marine in particular following her murder, and he lies and
in the files he claims to be in the Army,
not the Navy, not the Marine Corps, in the Army.
(16:02):
That's in the report, but that is often overlooked when
people do their investigation.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
Okay, by the way, I'm going to talk to William
Mann about his book and his investigation later down the
line in our podcast.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
And I also want to mention that when we first
heard about Man's book coming out towards the latter part
of twenty twenty five, showed that he had paid Margolis
as the likely suspect or as the suspect, and as
had Alex in his investigative work. So the fact that
(16:40):
these two people, Man and Baber, had no connection to
each other, didn't know what the other was doing, and
they both came to the same conclusion with well researched
information kind of supports the fact that even beyond those
two people's investigations, that he is likely the suspect. And
(17:03):
that's let alone all the information that we've recovered that
is great circumstantial evidence linking Merril Margolis.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
I just kind of want to add to that, it's
it's funny that people are so sort of fast to
push that narrative that he was cleared during the initial investigation,
which means that all of this information that Alex has
come up with today and that we verified with world
(17:34):
renowned experts, we're just supposed to ignore because he was
eliminated back in.
Speaker 5 (17:43):
Nineteen forty seven.
Speaker 4 (17:44):
And that just doesn't make sense as an investigator that
you would ignore compelling evidence on an elimination that we
really can't improve.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
This is kind of related, so sticking with the black
value here, especially you two homicide detectives, your view of
this and I, MITCHI, I know you've like looked through
the four drawers of the cabinet and we've all seen
the FBI files and the Grand Jewty flowles. What is
your view of this investigation? And obviously things are different now,
(18:19):
technology is way ahead of time and so forth. But
there's this lure out there that this was a state
of the art investigation. And I think if it was,
you know, the police chief would not have called for
a grand jury to refocus the case. I think if
it was, they might have at least charged somebody, But
(18:41):
no one was ever charged. No one was ever convicted
of this crime. What is there a way to reach
back almost eighty years and say this was a solid investigation.
I know it deals with some detectives who are pretty famous,
But I, as someone who's not a detective and who
(19:02):
is complete amateur and probably doesn't know what I'm talking about,
I see the string of things that were missed and
ultimately led to the grand jury kind of taking over
this case.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
What I can say about that is that, yes, the
detectives at the time have very good reputations as smart, dedicated,
hard working detectives. There is an abundance of investigative material.
There's no doubt that there was heart and that there
was just heart and soul, and they put everything into
(19:39):
this investigation. But knowing how cases like this kind of
get away from an investigator, you're never prepared in a
case like this that it's a gruesome case and you're
going to go in with it and give it all
your investigators and give it everything that you have. But
(20:00):
you're never prepared for the media to pick up on
a case like this and just take it and run.
And that's when a case like this can get away
from you. And you're so busy and the department is
so busy chasing down now leads from crank jobs and
(20:20):
nuts and legitimate people and at the same time trying
to just work the case that it can get away
from you quickly and things there can be shortcuts made,
or things can just get dropped because if anything, and
just by reading and go and having access to those files,
(20:41):
I can tell you that it would now if we
had a murder like that, it would be worked completely different.
It would be a ginormous task where so there would
be the entire division in Robert Homicide would be would
be given some role in that investigation, and it would
be worked until it was so And I can tell
(21:02):
you that that didn't happen back then. You know, there
were a handful of detectives on it, and they pushed
the case for initially for you know, and then it
kind of just whittled down to the main investigators assigned
to the case. And so although I can't fault their investigation,
because I do think they worked very diligently and hard, it.
Speaker 5 (21:27):
Seems to me that.
Speaker 4 (21:30):
Just the immense amount of attention from the media outside
from the public, that this case got away from them.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
And what I'll say about it is, you know, the
new chief of police came in William Wharton in nineteen
forty nine, and I can guarantee you, other than just
looking at the overall overall operation of the police department
as a new chief, one of the first things he
was going to do would want to do is get
(22:00):
a briefing on this case that had massive public interest,
a lot of people working on it.
Speaker 4 (22:06):
UH.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
And obviously what he heard he did not like, because
there is a whole news article about him saying that
he felt it was a bungled investigation and it needed
a new start, and he was the one that initiated
the call to start a grand jury and kind of
start from scratch and move forward through the through the
(22:31):
evidence and through the UH the investigative steps that had
already been taken, and maybe send it in a new direction.
So obviously he wasn't happy with it for whatever reason.
But he did in fact call it a quote unquote
bungled investigation, So that's that's key.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
I just wanted to mention that that some of these
documents that we're talking about, they'll they'll be available on
killeringnecode dot com. I just want to add too.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
Whenever the grand injury closed out, Detective Frank P. Jamison
for the DA's office, his last comment on his report,
his personal report was that he advised the incoming grand
jury to pick up the case again because he felt
that they were close to identifying and getting some justice
(23:19):
for Elizabeth Short and in the local newspaper articles, he
actually dav is quoted as stating that the original investigation
was subpar by his standards, as well as the other investigators.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
By the way, I'm not giving the names of the
people who sending these questions because we got many that
are the same, so I'd have to give a whole
list of names. So sorry about that if you're not
getting credit for your question. But here's a one word
for word that came in. Can you please address the
elephant in the room that many on the internet are
(23:55):
firmly convinced Arthur Lee Allen was the zodiacc Alex warning
to take that one all right.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
So from the moment the movie was released in two
thousand and seven, I remember the talk show, one of
the leading talk shows, bringing in Jake Gildenhall as well
as the individual that played Tashie on screen, which is
Mark Bruffalo, And they said, are the audience is gonna
be pissed when they leave the theater, that they're gonna
believe that Arthur Lee Allen's is Zodiac even though he's not.
(24:25):
And this interview is on YouTube if you get a
chance to watch it, and they both chuckle a little
bit and they're like, we assume. So with that being said,
the movie two thousand and seven was based on Robert
Graysmith's book that was released initially nineteen eighty six, revised
and released in twenty eleven twenty twelve, and it points
to Arthur Lee Allen, it's about as much fiction as
it is nonfiction, to be honest with you. And that
(24:47):
being said, to get down to the legal aspect of this,
Mark Lee Allen was cleared by three of the top
five forensic categories, that being handwriting which is the least
my opinion, fingerprints, and then DNA, So three of the
top five you you know, eliminate biometrics as being the
(25:08):
other one as well as audio. This tells you right
there that you got a guy that if I'm going
to wager on, I'm not wagering on him as being
the SDIAC.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
What is the source of the DNA.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
DNA they used was extracted from the stamps little of
this letter from two thousand and four. They attempted to
extract more DNA in twenty eighteen. Supposedly there's this individual
behind the scenes whistleblower that said they were unable to
distract in the DNA at all in twenty eighteen, so
they revert back to the partial DNA extraction. And it
is only partial, mind you, but they were able to
(25:42):
eliminate him as well as all other suspects to date.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Rick, were you going to say something?
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Yeah, And I have been told by someone that had
control of the Zodiac case with the San Francisco Police
Department from for years and that that person told me
that Arthur Lee Allen, his connection has is bullshits thet
(26:08):
the quote he used, and that he has been officially eliminated.
Speaker 1 (26:15):
So repeat itself.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Yeah, Yeah, that's all I can say on that, And
that's coming from somebody that's in the know of the
Zodiac San Francisco case. There was also a potential, and
I've never been able to confirm this, that there was
some potential DNA extracted from a glove that was left
at the crime scene inadvertently by the killer of Paul Stein,
(26:40):
the cab driver.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
There's a question surrounding night glove. Just for the record,
I'm not sure if it was left by a prior
affair or if it actually belongs to the perpetrator beating
the zodiac. It was found in the front floorboard. It
was it was Dunstan blood, guys, because you had Paul
Stein's blood that was it filled the floorboard panel if
you look at the photograph. So they're unsure the origin
of that as well, but there isn't a DNA that's
(27:04):
been extracted from that.
Speaker 1 (27:05):
You are correct. This is the perfect time to bring
up handwriting analysis since you mentioned that Arthur Lee Allen
was partially one of the clearances was on handwriting comparison.
That was very important to your investigation, Alex, because it
was like pursuing handwriting examples from Marvin Margolas Slash, Marvin
(27:26):
Merrill slash, many other names that you met with his
son to get handwriting examples, and of course you got
the sketch which is at the center of our investigation.
But whatever, what's the latest or where are we on
handwriting analysis on this case?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Okay, So we have one confirmation that we had in
our back pocket and we started this and we had
one received last nighte from any Great Forensic Services who's
also confirmed aid that he can't eliminate more Margolis as
the author of any of the letters, including the Zodiac
or Black Dalua. The reason being is because there's capital
(28:05):
box letters that are not personal in description, as well
as lowercase incursive that we supplied him with. But he
also said that there was evidence suggesting that Marvin Margoles
was the author of the Zodiac letters. So we have
a win win situation. We have not one but two
experts independently confirming, one be on the side of a
(28:27):
doubt his opinion, the other one saying that he can't
be eliminated and that he is in most likelihood the
author of the zodiac letters.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Okay, and I just want to also add, and obviously
I am not an expert and Mitzi is not an
expert in handwriting, but we both handled cases we're handwriting,
and so we spent time with question document examiners with
LAPD who handle hundreds and hundreds of these cases a year,
and so you pick up some things just from live
(28:56):
listening to them and they're now learning about their analysis
on our cases. And just for me looking at some
of the letters, I'm not saying all of them, but
some of the letters are so unique that I just
my gut feeling as wow, this is pretty strong stuff. Again,
I'm not a court qualified expert, but using common sense
(29:19):
and the stuff we've learned from question document Zamer's, I
would say it looks pretty good, and especially in some
of the cursive lower case cursive things.
Speaker 3 (29:31):
I believe that the general public would have to agree
with this guy. So I don't think I've read one
comment that's negative about the handwriting similarities.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Well, we'll put some of those up on the website
as well, where you can see the comparison and also
correct me if I'm wrong or actually say this better
than me Alex. But in the world of handwriting analysis,
if you see one thing that doesn't match, you have
(30:01):
to eliminate. And so when our latest review or analysis
comes back and says that Margola slash Merrill cannot be eliminated,
that means they saw nothing that doesn't match. I'm saying
this wrong, but I'm saying it's a very high standard.
Speaker 3 (30:19):
Correct, You're correct, Michael, if they see one indication or
a red flag, at that point, they have to acknowledge that,
meaning that they have to state that this individual either
there's any probability that he's not the author or that
he isn't the author.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
Okay, And we had none of that, and either of
our do analysis made by separate company, separate people. They
probably know each other because it's a small group, I think.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
But they didn't actually know each other because I didn't
make it aware to them when we requested that we
get their independent analysis. I didn't want them to be
aware one another. I wanted them to come back and
see if they came to the same conclusion, which they
both did.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
This is running longer than I thought and planned, so
we're going to actually break this into two parts, and
so we'll be back. You can take a break now.
I'm talking to our listeners, not you three, but we're
going to end this one this podcast, and there'll be
a part two. I'm Michael Connolly, and you've been listening
(31:22):
to Killer in the Code Solving the Black Dahlia and
Zodiac cases. That concludes the first half of our roundtable discussion,
where we take in questions from the listening audience. If
you've enjoyed it, check out chapter eight, where we continue
the discussion. Thank you for listening.
Popular Podcasts
Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics
Two Guys (Bowen Yang and Matt Rogers). Five Rings (you know, from the Olympics logo). One essential podcast for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics. Bowen Yang (SNL, Wicked) and Matt Rogers (Palm Royale, No Good Deed) of Las Culturistas are back for a second season of Two Guys, Five Rings, a collaboration with NBC Sports and iHeartRadio. In this 15-episode event, Bowen and Matt discuss the top storylines, obsess over Italian culture, and find out what really goes on in the Olympic Village.
Milan Cortina Winter Olympics
The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan Cortina are here and have everyone talking. iHeartPodcasts is buzzing with content in honor of the XXV Winter Olympics We’re bringing you episodes from a variety of iHeartPodcast shows to help you keep up with the action. Follow Milan Cortina Winter Olympics so you don’t miss any coverage of the 2026 Winter Olympics, and if you like what you hear, be sure to follow each Podcast in the feed for more great content from iHeartPodcasts.
iHeartOlympics: The Latest
Listen to the latest news from the 2026 Winter Olympics.