Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / The Boston Strangler - A Chilling Chapter in American Crime History

Transcript

The Boston Strangler - A Chilling Chapter in American Crime History · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to the deep dive. Today. We're taking a look
• 0:03
  back at the nineteen sixties. It's a decade we often
• 0:06
  think of through cultural shifts, big changes, but we want
• 0:09
  to dig a little deeper beneath that surface to look
• 0:11
  at some real darkness that define the era for so
• 0:14
  many people. We're talking about the shadow cast by two
• 0:18
  of the most well terrifying and just enduring criminal mysteries
• 0:23
  in American history.
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: That's right. We're comparing the Boston Strangler and the Zodiac Killer.
• 0:27
  And we've got quite a stack material here, police reports,
• 0:30
  historical analyses, even recent forensic updates. Our goal really is
• 0:34
  to understand not just what happened, but the fundamental difference
• 0:37
  is how their methods, their interactions with the media, and
• 0:41
  the investigative challenges shape their legacy so differently exactly.
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: And our mission here is to pull out those key
• 0:46
  insights you the listener will see pretty quickly. I think
• 0:49
  that these cases represent two almost opposite models of serial predation.
• 0:55
  One operated in this intimate, suffocating silence, the other used
• 0:59
  well brazen public theatrics and.
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: Just to set the scene. The Boston Strangler mostly active
• 1:05
  sixty two to sixty four, Boston area, very urban, very dense.
• 1:09
  Then the Zodiac Killer a few years later, late nineteen
• 1:13
  sixties northern California, very different environment and.
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: The big thing connecting them, besides the fear they generated.
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: Both remain officially unsolved cases in their entirety, still generating debates,
• 1:24
  still generating theories.
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's dive into that first wave of terror. Then Massachusetts,
• 1:29
  early sixties, the strangler. It starts and immediately the nature
• 1:34
  of the crime sends shockwaves. Yeah.
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: The first recognized victim June nineteen sixty two, Anna Slooser's
• 1:40
  fifty five years old, found in her apartment. She'd been
• 1:43
  sexually assaulted, strangled with a cord from her own bathrobe. Actually,
• 1:46
  the scene was quite disturbed.
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: And initially police might have treated it as a one off.
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: But then, but then more happened, similar circumstances, similar methods.
• 1:54
  Over the next year and a half, the pattern became
• 1:56
  terrifyingly clear. This wasn't isolated. It was a serial predator.
• 2:00
  The city knew it had a major crisis.
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: And what really ramped up the panic, as I understand
• 2:05
  it was the sheer randomness. Usually with serial offenders, you
• 2:09
  see a type, right, a specific.
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: Target completely that's one of the first crucial distinctions here.
• 2:14
  Thirteen women confirmed victims Boston, Cambridge, Lawrence, Salem, several communities
• 2:20
  affected in the ages. I mean, it's just staggering. The
• 2:24
  youngest was Mary Sullivan, only nineteen. The oldest, Mary Mullin,
• 2:28
  was eighty five.
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: Nineteen to eighty five. That's that destroys any sense of
• 2:31
  predictability exactly.
• 2:33
  Speaker 2: Professionals, homemakers, retirees, women living alone, women with families. There
• 2:37
  was no clear economic or social thread linking them.
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: Which meant basically every woman in the greater Boston area
• 2:43
  felt vulnerable, not just a specific group, but everyone inside
• 2:47
  their own homes.
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: Yes, the fear wasn't just about being out at night.
• 2:51
  It was about being in your supposedly safe space. The
• 2:54
  killer wasn't targeting a demographic so much as the vulnerability
• 2:57
  of being a woman alone indoors.
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: And paralyzes a city. Doesn't. It changes how people live
• 3:02
  day to day.
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, trust evaporated, people installing new locks, checking on neighbors constantly,
• 3:08
  Women reluctant to be alone at all. It fed this
• 3:11
  sense of pervasive dread. The police had almost nothing to
• 3:16
  go on for profiling.
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: But despite the huge range in victims. The method itself,
• 3:21
  the MO had some chilling consistencies.
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: It did very intimate crimes. The core elements were sexual
• 3:27
  assault followed by strangulation, and he often used ligatures found
• 3:31
  right there the victim's own stalking scarves, belts, things from
• 3:35
  their home.
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: Which adds another layer of violation. And then there was
• 3:37
  that signature detail, the bow.
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: Right, that's the detail that really sticks with people. In
• 3:43
  several cases, the killer tied the ligature into this meticulous,
• 3:47
  almost decorative bow around the victim's neck.
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: It's just it takes it from brutal violence to something
• 3:52
  almost ritualistic. Coldly methodical. Suggests a certain psychological element, doesn't it.
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: It certainly suggests control, maybe a specific kind of signature
• 4:01
  he felt compelled to leave. But maybe the most vital
• 4:03
  clue about how he operated was the lack of forced
• 4:05
  entry in most cases.
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: Okay, so he wasn't breaking windows or kicking down doors.
• 4:09
  He was getting in.
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: He was being let in. He gained access by gaining trust.
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: How what's the thinging on that posing as.
• 4:17
  Speaker 2: Someone The dominant theory later supported by Albert Dissalvo's confession
• 4:22
  was that he posed as a repairman maintenance worker, maybe
• 4:25
  a delivery guy, someone seemingly legitimate, which plays.
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: On the societal norms of the time, a certain baseline trust,
• 4:32
  especially for someone who looked like they belong there exactly.
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: He exploited that trust, that domestic protocol. He needed to
• 4:38
  be convincing, needed to talk his way in. It required
• 4:42
  a certain kind of predatory, skilled deception, not just brute force.
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: Okay, So let's shift from the crimes themselves to the investigation,
• 4:49
  and this is where the nineteen sixties context becomes so critical.
• 4:53
  Law enforcement facing this without the tools we rely on today.
• 4:57
  Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely critical. You have to put yourself back. Then
• 5:00
  we relied heavily on basic forensics fingerprints if they were
• 5:03
  lucky and usable trace evidence fibers, hair, but collection methods
• 5:07
  were let's say less refined. Contamination was a huge issue.
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: And witness statements, interrogations. Yeah, but no.
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: DNA, no DNA. That's the game changer we have now
• 5:18
  that they completely lacked. If the killer was careful or
• 5:21
  gloves didn't leave a clear print, the physical evidence trail
• 5:24
  could go cold, very very quickly.
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: And we know organizationally it was a mess at first too.
• 5:29
  Speaker 2: A huge mess. The killings cross city lines involving Boston PD,
• 5:33
  State Police Police, and Cambridge Lawrence.
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: Multiple jurisdictions, different agencies, maybe different priorities, not always sharing
• 5:41
  information smoothly.
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: That's putting it mildly. It seriously hampered the early efforts.
• 5:46
  Information wasn't flowing the way it needed to. Evidence collected
• 5:49
  in one place might not connect to another.
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: Which led to the creation of the Strangler Bureau, this
• 5:53
  big task force that was a direct response to that fragmentation.
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: Then, precisely, it was really born out of necessity and
• 6:00
  intense public pressure. They had to centralize the effort force
• 6:04
  these agencies to pool resources, share intelligence, coordinate surveillance. It
• 6:08
  was actually quite groundbreaking for its time, one of the
• 6:11
  first major interagency task forces focused on a serial killer.
• 6:15
  But it was definitely a reaction to the initial failures.
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: And even within this bureau there wasn't consensus. Was there.
• 6:21
  This idea of multiple killers emerged.
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: That's right, the multiple killers theory. It gained real traction
• 6:26
  among some investigators.
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: Why what fueled that doubt about a single perpetrator?
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: Primarily the inconsistencies The vast age range nineteen to eighty
• 6:36
  five seemed improbable for one killer's single motive and slight
• 6:41
  variations in the mo Like Beverly Salmons, she wasn't strangled,
• 6:44
  she was stabbed multra times that didn't fit the primary pattern.
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: So some investigators thought maybe the intense media coverage of
• 6:50
  the strangler might have inspired copycats.
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: Exactly, that maybe there was a core killer. But others
• 6:56
  perhaps took advantage of the climate of fear, adding to
• 6:59
  the body count and muddying the waters for the investigation, which.
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: Makes identifying the original strangler or stranglers even harder.
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: Im messly harder. It introduces doubt at a fundamental level.
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: But eventually one name did come to dominate the narrative.
• 7:14
  Albert de Salvo. How did he enter the picture? It
• 7:18
  wasn't initially through the Strangler investigation, was it?
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: No, not at all. DiSalvo was a handyman thirty three
• 7:25
  years old, had a prior record. He was arrested in
• 7:27
  November nineteen sixty four, but for a completely different series
• 7:31
  of crimes. These were the so called green man assaults.
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: The green Man why that name.
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: Simply because victims often described the assailant, who also gained
• 7:40
  entry by tricking his way into apartments, wearing greenwork pants
• 7:43
  or clothing.
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: So similar Mo in terms of gaining entry, but different.
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: Outcome critically different. The green Man victims were sexually assaulted,
• 7:51
  often tied up, but they survived, and because they survived,
• 7:54
  they could provide descriptions identify them. That's what led to
• 7:57
  his arrests.
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: Okay, so he's in custody for those crimes, how does
• 8:00
  he suddenly become the Boston Strangler.
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: Well, while he was in custody, apparently awaiting trial for
• 8:05
  the green Man offences, something shifted. He started talking. He
• 8:09
  began confessing quite dramatically to being the Boston strangler.
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: And this is where things get really complex. Confession is huge, obviously,
• 8:19
  but Descelvo he wasn't necessarily seen as the most reliable source.
• 8:23
  Speaker 2: Was he No, he had a reputation for exaggeration, for
• 8:28
  seeking attention. But the detail in his confession was stunning.
• 8:32
  He described specific crime scenes, how he got in using
• 8:36
  the repair men ruse, details about the victim's apartments, their clothing,
• 8:39
  the specific ways they were strangled, things the police believed
• 8:43
  only the killer could possibly know.
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: Details they'd kept confidential, many.
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: Of them yes, which gave the confession immense weight. Despite
• 8:49
  Dissalvo's background.
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: And then his lawyer, f Lee Bailey comes into the picture,
• 8:54
  a big name, a huge.
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: Name even then, and Bailey immediately took this confession public,
• 9:00
  let's say, very adept at using the media. He essentially
• 9:03
  cemented to Salvo as the strangler in the public imagination,
• 9:06
  long before any trial or definitive proof. It became this
• 9:10
  massive media event centered entirely on the confession.
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: But and this is the massive butt that hangs over
• 9:16
  the case. For all those details, there was no hard
• 9:19
  physical evidence linking him directly to the thirteen Strangler murders.
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: None, no definitive fingerprints matching him at the scenes, no
• 9:27
  biological evidence like seamen or blood that they could tie
• 9:30
  to him back then, nothing concrete.
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: So the entire case against him as the strangler rested
• 9:35
  solely on his word.
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: Pretty much, and that word was immediately contested. Skeptics pointed
• 9:39
  to his personality, the possibility he leaned details from news reports,
• 9:43
  or even more disturbingly, the theory that he might have
• 9:46
  been fed.
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: Information, fed information by whom.
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: There were suggestions, particularly involving a fellow inmate named George Nassar,
• 9:53
  who some believe might have had knowledge of the crimes,
• 9:56
  maybe even access to case details somehow and could have
• 9:59
  coached to Salvo. It adds another layer of deep uncertainty.
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: So legally what happened.
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: He confessed, but he was never actually charged with any
• 10:08
  of the thirteen Strangler murders. The prosecutors likely felt the
• 10:12
  confession alone without corroborating physical evidence, wouldn't stand up in court,
• 10:17
  especially given the potential challenges to its validity.
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: So he was convicted for the green Man crimes only correct.
• 10:22
  Speaker 2: He got a life sentence for those assaults in nineteen
• 10:25
  sixty seven. The Boston Strangler case itself, those thirteen homicides
• 10:29
  technically remained open, the lack of evidence, the multiple killers theory,
• 10:33
  it wasn't closed.
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: And then adding another layer of mystery, Dissalvo himself is
• 10:37
  murdered in prison in nineteen seventy three.
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: Stabbed to death in his cell, and the timing was
• 10:43
  again suspicious. There were rumors reports that he was maybe
• 10:46
  about to talk again, maybe recamp parts of his confession,
• 10:49
  or perhaps reveal more, maybe even implicate others.
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: His death just cemented the ambiguity forever, didn't it. The
• 10:55
  one person who claimed responsibility was silenced exactly.
• 10:59
  Speaker 2: It meant the mystery in its original form would likely
• 11:03
  never be fully resolved.
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: Until decades later. Let's jump forward to twenty thirteen, modern
• 11:08
  science finally weighs in.
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: Yes. A major development. Advances in DNA technology allowed investigators
• 11:14
  to do something impossible in the sixties. They got approval
• 11:18
  to exum DeSalvo's body and.
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: They compared his DNA to what.
• 11:22
  Speaker 2: To preserved semen evidence recovered from the body and closing
• 11:25
  of Mary Sullivan, the nineteen year old, the final victim,
• 11:28
  and the result a conclusive match. Forensic science definitively linked
• 11:32
  Elbert de Salva to the murder of Mary Sullivan.
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: Okay, that's huge. It proves he was involved in at
• 11:37
  least one of the killings, But what does that mean
• 11:38
  for the other twelve? Does it close the book?
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: And that's the crucial nuance. It confirms he was involved,
• 11:43
  that he killed Mary Sullivan, but it does not automatically
• 11:47
  mean he killed all thirteen. Remember the inconsistencies, the different
• 11:51
  victim types, the fact that ligatures were often items from
• 11:55
  the scene not brought by the killer, the varying mos Right.
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: So the DNA links is then doesn't necessarily negate the
• 12:01
  possibility of other killers or copycats for the other twelve victims.
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: Precisely, the evidence from the other crime scenes was much
• 12:08
  less definitive or non existent in terms of biological material
• 12:12
  linking specifically to Dissalvo. So while it solidified his role
• 12:15
  in part of the spree, didn't resolve the entire puzzle.
• 12:18
  The multiple killers theory remains plausible for some of those
• 12:21
  other cases, So the legacy is complicated.
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: A confessed killer now linked by DNA to one victim,
• 12:27
  but the full scope of his responsibility and whether he
• 12:29
  acted alone for all thirteen remains officially uncertain. It really
• 12:33
  highlights those sixties limitations. Okay, let's pivot now, we leave
• 12:38
  the claustrophobic, intimate terror of Boston and head west to
• 12:42
  northern California. L eight sixties. The Zodiac Killer a totally different
• 12:47
  kind of predator, a different kind of fear.
• 12:49
  Speaker 2: It really is a complete shift in environment, psychology, everything.
• 12:52
  The Strangler hid within the dense urban fabric, exploiting private spaces.
• 12:56
  The Zodiac he operated out in the open relatively and
• 13:00
  made his crimes public spectacles.
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: In the timeline.
• 13:03
  Speaker 2: His confirmed attacks were mainly concentrated between December and nineteen
• 13:06
  sixty eight on October nineteen sixty nine, five confirmed, killed,
• 13:11
  two others seriously injured, and.
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: The victim's also a major difference from.
• 13:15
  Speaker 2: The Strangler, huge difference, No more solitary women in apartments.
• 13:19
  The Zodiac's known victims were primarily young couples, teenagers or
• 13:23
  people in their twenties. Targeted ware in secluded spots, lovers lanes,
• 13:27
  parked cars by lakesides, places where young people went for privacy.
• 13:31
  He attacked vulnerability in public but isolated spaces.
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: So the MO shifts from intimate strangulation inside homes to
• 13:40
  what how did the Zodiac operate?
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: Swift brutal attacks, often involving firearms. He famously used a
• 13:46
  nine millimeters pistol on several attacks, but also a knife
• 13:49
  in the very public, terrifying attack at Lake Buriessa.
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: And notably less emphasis on sexual assault compared to the Strangler. Right.
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: While there might have been some possible undertones, consistent sexual
• 13:59
  assault wasn't the defining feature of the Zodiac's MO like
• 14:01
  it was for the Strangler. His seemed more about control, terror,
• 14:05
  and perhaps the act of killing itself, often carried out quickly.
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: Speed and surprise in public areas versus slow methodical deception
• 14:13
  in private homes. Polar opposites. Now we get to maybe
• 14:17
  this single biggest difference between them, the thing that really
• 14:19
  defines their separate legacies.
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: Communication absolutely the defining factor. Let's restate it. During the
• 14:26
  entire Boston strangler spree sixty two to sixty four, the
• 14:30
  police and media received nothing directly from the killer. Zero communication.
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: The investigation was purely about the physical evidence, the bodies,
• 14:38
  the crime scenes, witness accounts, A vacuum of information from
• 14:41
  the source.
• 14:42
  Speaker 2: A total vacuum. Now contrast that with the Zodiac.
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: He wasn't just a killer. He was almost a correspondent.
• 14:48
  Speaker 2: He absolutely was. His notoriety is inseparable from his letters.
• 14:51
  He didn't just commit crimes, he announced them. He wrote
• 14:55
  taunting letters to major Bay Area newspapers, The Chronicle, The Examiner,
• 14:59
  the Valeoti Times Harold. He'd boast about the killings, provide
• 15:02
  details only the killer could know to prove it was him,
• 15:05
  threatened more violence if his letters weren't published prominently.
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: And he even called the police sometimes.
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: Yes, after the Lake Barriessa stabbings, he called the NAPA
• 15:14
  Police Department from a payphone, calmly reported the crime, described
• 15:18
  the car and told them where to find it. Just Raizen, he.
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: Was actively directing the narrative, forcing the police and media
• 15:25
  to react to him completely.
• 15:27
  Speaker 2: And then came the Cipher's.
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: Ah Yes, the Zodiac's infamous puzzles part of his whole
• 15:32
  performance exactly.
• 15:33
  Speaker 2: He sent these complex cryptograms, challenging the police and the
• 15:37
  public to decode them. It was a game, a way
• 15:40
  to demonstrate his supposed intellectual superiority and keep everyone obsessed.
• 15:45
  The first one, the four oh eight Cipher, arrived in
• 15:47
  three parts with his early letters in sixty.
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: Nine, and that one was solved relatively quickly.
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah, a high school teacher and his wife, Donald and
• 15:54
  Betty Harden cracked it within about a week. It was
• 15:57
  a fairly straightforward substitution cipher revealing a rambling message about
• 16:01
  collecting slaves for the afterlife.
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: But then came the really tough one, the three forty cipher.
• 16:07
  Speaker 2: Right sent later in sixty nine. This one was much
• 16:09
  much harder. It resisted decoding for well for over fifty years.
• 16:13
  It involved complex patterns, maybe diagonal reading, unusual transposition. Cryptographers
• 16:21
  amateur and professional worked on.
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: It for decades, fifty years. Think about the investigative resources
• 16:27
  the public fascination poured into that one puzzle.
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: Immense It became this legendary unsolved piece of the puzzle.
• 16:34
  It was only cracked in twenty twenty by a team
• 16:36
  of private citizens, an American software engineer, a Belgian programmer,
• 16:40
  and an Australian mathematician.
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: And it just highlights how effectively he used these communications
• 16:46
  to control the focus to build his own myth.
• 16:48
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, he claimed responsibility for I think up to thirty
• 16:52
  seven murders in his letters, far more than the five confirmed.
• 16:55
  He created the image of this elusive, super intelligent killer,
• 16:58
  and the media, hungry for the story, amplified it. He
• 17:01
  played them perfectly.
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: So this constant communication creates a totally different dynamic for
• 17:05
  investigators compared to the Strangler case.
• 17:07
  Speaker 2: Totally different. With the Boston Strangler, the focus eventually narrowed
• 17:11
  onto one person, Albert de Salvo. The debate was about him,
• 17:15
  his confession, the evidence against him. They had a central figure,
• 17:19
  even if controversial.
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: But the Zodiac, there's no dissalvol equivalent, is there none?
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: That's the black hole at the center of the Zodiac case.
• 17:27
  There have been suspects, most famously Arthur Lee Allen, who
• 17:30
  was investigated intensely for years. Police looked at his background,
• 17:34
  his movements, compared his handwriting, his fingerprints, but nothing ever
• 17:38
  definitively linked him. No smoking gun, no confession, no DNA
• 17:43
  match later on.
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: So the lack of a central confirmed suspect, combined with
• 17:47
  the killer's own voice dominating the narrative through letters in ciphers,
• 17:52
  that's why it feels so much more open ended.
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: Exactly, the strangler mystery is largely about confirming the guilt
• 17:57
  or reach of a known individual. The Zodiac mist tree
• 18:00
  is still fundamentally about identifying an unknown figure. His anonymity,
• 18:03
  paradoxically was secured by his communication. It has fueled endless
• 18:07
  speculation and amateur sleuthing for decades.
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: It's just fascinating, isn't it. How silent shaped one legacy
• 18:13
  and constant communication shaped the other. Let's talk about the
• 18:16
  broader impact the shadows. These cases left institutionally and culturally okay.
• 18:21
  Speaker 2: While looking at law enforcement, both cases forced uncomfortable changes.
• 18:25
  The Boston strangler mess really spurred the development of better
• 18:29
  interagency cooperation. That Strangler Bureau, despite its rocky start, set
• 18:33
  a precedent for task forces we see today, and it
• 18:37
  also pushed investigators, albeit tentatively, towards early forms of psychological profiling,
• 18:43
  trying to understand the why behind the victim selection. Even
• 18:46
  with its randomness.
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: And socially, the Strangler case really shattered that feeling of
• 18:50
  safety within the home, particularly for women in cities.
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, it fundamentally altered perceptions of urban security. The idea
• 18:57
  that danger wasn't just on the street, but could come
• 18:59
  not looking at your door, disguised as help that was profound.
• 19:03
  It led to changes in personal security, habits, building security,
• 19:07
  and so on.
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: The Zodiac, on the other hand, taught police a very different,
• 19:10
  very public lesson.
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: Yeah, his case was a crash course in dealing with
• 19:15
  a killer manipulating the media. Law enforcement was caught flat footed,
• 19:19
  unsure how to handle someone using newspapers and TV to
• 19:22
  taunt them and spread fear. It raised huge questions about
• 19:26
  how much information to release, how to manage the press
• 19:29
  during an active hunt for someone using the press, and
• 19:32
  of course the challenge of complex evidence like ciphers.
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: And you see this difference reflected in how they're remembered
• 19:38
  in popular culture too.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: Definitely, think about the major films, the nineteen sixty eight
• 19:42
  movie The Boston Strangler with Tony Curtis is very much
• 19:44
  focused on to salvo the man, his psychology, the ambiguity
• 19:48
  of his confession. It's about the suspect and the tragedy.
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: Whereas David Fincher's two thousand and seven Zodiac is almost
• 19:53
  entirely about the investigation exactly.
• 19:56
  Speaker 2: It's about the process, the frustration, the obsession of the
• 19:59
  police and journalists trying to catch this ghost, to keep
• 20:01
  sending the messages. It's about the chase, the enigma itself,
• 20:05
  not a central suspect.
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: The Strangler film asks was it him? The Zodiac film
• 20:10
  asks who was he? And before we wrap up, it's
• 20:13
  vital we bring it back to the real people involved.
• 20:15
  These weren't just cases. They were devastating.
• 20:18
  Speaker 2: Losses, absolutely crucial to remember. Thirteen women in the Boston area,
• 20:22
  the young victims of the Zodiac in California. Their lives
• 20:26
  are cut short violently. Their families endured unimaginable grief. While
• 20:31
  we analyze the killers and the investigations, the true legacy
• 20:34
  lies with them. Their tragedies did ultimately lead to some
• 20:38
  positive changes, improve police procedures, victims support services, a greater
• 20:42
  awareness of safety. But the cost was immense.
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: So if we were to synthesize the core truth from
• 20:48
  comparing these two dark chapters of the sixties, what's the
• 20:51
  main takeaway for you?
• 20:53
  Speaker 2: For me, it's how they both starkly revealed the limitations
• 20:56
  of investigation in that era. The forensic limits the organizational struggles,
• 21:00
  but then they diverge completely based on the killer's interaction
• 21:03
  with the world. The Strangler silent, intimate, operating in the shadows.
• 21:07
  His story is partially anchored decades later by DNA, linking
• 21:11
  one man di salvo to one rictim but leaving the
• 21:14
  rest shrouded in doubt.
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: While the Zodiac the Zodiac.
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: Loud, theatrical, a public performer, he defined himself through his
• 21:22
  tons and puzzles, ensuring his own enduring anonymity, precisely because
• 21:26
  he communicated so much, leaving behind no central suspect, just
• 21:29
  an endless, fascinating, frustrating mystery.
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: Silence allowed technology to eventually catch up. Partially, communication created
• 21:37
  a legend that technology still hasn't fully unraveled.
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: That's a great way to put it. The Strangler showed
• 21:42
  silence can hide guilt until science advances. The Zodiac showed
• 21:46
  calculated communication can create an enigma that outlasts the evidence.
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: It really makes you think, doesn't it. If these exact
• 21:53
  crimes happen today, with ubiquitous CCTV, digital footprints instant communication analysis,
• 21:58
  would either spree have last more than a few weeks?
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: Likely not, But the Zodiac's case, especially the fact that
• 22:04
  someone could create such a public persona taunt authorities so
• 22:07
  brazenly and still potentially get away with it, even with
• 22:10
  handwriting analysis and intense scrutiny, it's a chilling reminder. It
• 22:14
  leaves us with that question, how much does a killer's
• 22:17
  choice to be silent or to shout dictate how history
• 22:19
  remembers them and whether justice is ever truly found. What
• 22:23
  unsolved case from today, even with all our tech, might
• 22:25
  look completely different, perhaps even unsolvable, if it happened fifty
• 22:29
  years ago. Something for you to definitely ponder.