Zodiac Unmasked: The Identity of America's Most Exclusive Serial Killer: The Identity of America's Most Elusive Serial Killer Revealed [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

It is true that this book is not as engaging and riveting as the first. For some reason though, some people have it out for the author Graysmith. This book is based on and is a literal text of Graysmith's thought process. Like anyone's thought process, this doesn't mean that it's all based entirely in fact. As I said in my review of "Zodiac", most police work isn't based totally in the facts but in speculation that most likely fits those facts. Being as how we weren't at the scene as the crimes were being committed, and if we had all the facts we'd know without a doubt who Zodiac was or is, speculation, whether loosely based on the facts or not, is necessary.

It is fact that Arthur Leigh Allen is the favorite suspect of many of the law enforcement officials closest to the Zodiac investigation. This book isn't how they came to that, but how Graysmith did. Graysmith is no Mike Hammer or, even a spin-off of Zodiac's favorite SFPD inspector Dave Toschi. He's a novice taking a novice's approach. This book is a good continuation of the first book, but it obviously loses a little bit because it doesn't contain the introductions to the crimes and the imagery that comes with such descriptions. I enjoyed it for what it was; don't let people deter you from this work because they have it out for the author. Read it and decide for yourself, make your own conclusions. I'm glad I did.

Zodiac Unmasked is an extraordinarily-detailed, highly entertaining book. I recommend it to any person with a strong interest in true crime. If you really want to get wrapped up in the excitement of this case, this is a very good place to start.

Graysmith does a great job of fleshing out prime Zodiac suspect Arthur Leigh Allen. Allen is just too bizarre and complicated to be a fictional character. He's big and scary, athletic and powerfully-strong. Though sometimes prone to outbursts or physical acts toward others (he was known to throw acquaintances to the ground, knee to the chest before they knew what happened) he often appeared gentle and well-mannered. He had an odd assortment of friends and acquaintances and many unusual interests and hobbies. After both his parents died, he still chose to live in a creepy basement rather than the main floor of the house he inherited.

Though extremely intelligent and talented, Allen never seemed to reach his potential and ultimately ended up working in menial jobs. A diabetic who refused to alter his lifestyle (he was fond of Coors Beer), he later developed serious complications which caused him to lose his mobility and his eyesight.

But even in the earlier stages of his disease, Allen would have experienced diminished mobility, vision loss and coordination which could explain Zodiac's sudden disappearance from the scene. His extremely unpleasant experience being locked up at Atascadero would also explain his refusal to ever reveal his identity as Zodiac. He would not want to risk prison, especially with his ill health. He would deny that he was Zodiac up until his death at 58 from diabetes-related heart disease.

I thoroughly disagree with those here who say this book is poorly-written. And I strongly take issue with the idea that Graysmith's theory that Allen is Zodiac has now been "proven" wrong by DNA evidence.

No one, not even the SFPD, has ever come forward with evidence "proving" anything. The questionable "DNA fingerprint" said to be developed by SFPD DNA lab personnel in 2002 (6 years after their earlier, inconclusive testing) does not exonerate Arthur Leigh Allen. And, other than this SFPD analysis, there is no "other evidence" that would allow this case to reach a conclusion. The careful wording, "seems to clear Zodiac suspect" and "may" are used in press reports. Nothing definite there. Arthur Leigh Allen remains a viable suspect.

SFPD's story for publication is that "genetic traces" were found due to "powerful new DNA technology" and that "trace amounts of saliva" were found under a stamp. I would feel a lot better about this information if someone without a vested interest in the outcome of this thing, (in other words, not SFPD) had done the testing and had done it prior to SFPD's handling of the evidence. Anyone who has worked in law enforcement as I have for years (having come from generations of law enforcement) is aware of the enormous egos many cops have, especially when involved in a high profile case like this. From what I have seen over the years, I would not be at all surprised if lab personnel were persuaded to make "findings," or to overstate the significance of actual findings, that would result in this case pointing in a direction more favorable to SFPD, making them the solvers and discrediting someone they clearly saw as a busybody nobody paperboy horning in on their territory.

True DNA testing is an extraordinary crime-solving tool, but the human factor always has to be considered. There is no longer a pressing need to determine who Zodiac is or was, as he's not actively killing. This is now mostly about the public's curiosity, but also a battle of the egos. Sad to say, many people, cops included, don't play fair. Many SF cops supported Graysmith's work, but others, and most likely SF upper echelon law enforcement, didn't care for this situation at all for P.R. reasons.

As for people who feel Graysmith was unqualified, I say this: you have to be rather specially-talented to work as a political cartoonist for a paper like the Chronicle. It requires artistic ability, political savvy and, yes, an intelligence that may qualify him to actually be smart enough to figure a few things out. Homicide detectives, on the other hand, are rarely master detectives. A promotion to Homicide is a sought-after political perk mostly reserved for those well-connected in law enforcement. It is not awarded to the best and brightest. Homicide cops are usually cops of ordinary ability with some political clout. From the time I was a kid, I have heard over and over, "He got promoted to detective and he's on his way down to headquarters to pick up a bag of brains."

I'm not saying cops are worse than anyone else. I'm just saying they're ordinary people, and ordinary people cheat, manipulate and alter the truth all the time to further a conclusion they're more happy with.

Arthur Leigh Allen still looks good for these crimes, and until someone other than SFPD comes up with something provable and not subject to dispute, I will continue to consider this fascinating, incredibly-complicated, highly-intelligent man to be the prime suspect in the Zodiac murders. I would strongly encourage people who want to read this book to just do it and ignore the negative criticisms here. Like another writer here, I am really wondering if those who criticized the book actually read it. I would also recommend the movie, though it doesn't go into detail about Allen, it is well-done and well worth the six bucks.

I am amazed at the hostility against this book demonstrated by several reviewers. I found Graysmith's case against Leigh Allen to be persuasive. I bought this one right after seeing the new "Zodiac" film, which I also liked. With that background, or a background from having read Graysmith's "Zodiac" book from many years ago, "Unmasked" is a worthy read. I would not advise anyone without familiarity of the case to pick this up first, however. It is a complicated story that stretches from 1966 to the 1990's and beyond, and has a cast of scores of cops and suspects and victims and their family members. If you liked the movie, you probably don't need to read "Zodiac." Try "Unmasked" instead. How some readers can think that Arthur Leigh Allen is NOT the most likely killer is beyond me, but mysteries and conspiracies attract us precisely because we all think we can do better than the cops and reporters in coming up with a solution.