Tom + Purple

2008 April 3
by Bystander
If you are new to this site, first read the post below this one titled “Purple Haze”.

UPDATED 4/9/08


Tom +

According to associates of Richard Gaikowski that I easily found, Tom Voigt never contacted them for handwriting samples (or anything else). It appears that Tom Voigt didn’t try to verify any allegations before he made them because he doesn’t want the Good Times to end. Or the “donations” to stop rolling in. Is that taxable income?
To reiterate: NO ONE CONTACTED THEM. So much for Tom, Davidmm, Bill and others claiming to leave no stone unturned searching for handwritng samples and other evidence.

Tom Voigt made up a real rip snorter today. He just discovered (Blaine again?) that Richard Gaikowski wrote under several pen names. It’s a pretty convenient device to allow all kinds of sludge into the evidence pool by claiming Richard Gaikowski is the author no matter who signed it. Showing no proof that Richard Gaikowski is “goatkirk”, he says that “goatkirk” admits to using several pen names.


A few days ago, Tom Voigt wrote: “… According to Blaine, Gike told Blaine that his arrest was the result of an altercation with Darlene. We know that’s not true, but it’s what Gike claimed. It doesn’t make Blaine a liar.”
That statement makes my head spin. It isn’t what “Gike” claimed. It is what Blaine said that “Gike” claimed.


Purple’s reign of terror

Update on my speculation about the Tom+Purple axis. Blaine does exist. I was wrong. Friends of Richard Gaikowski have known about Blaine for years. The serial stalker has been accusing Richard Gaikowski of outrageous crimes for decades.

Two more questions for Tom Voigt. Is Blaine the source of your latest revelation about “goatkirk”? If Blaine told you what he told Ed Sanders, that he also witnessed Richard/Zodiac making “sweet love” to Charles Manson, did that raise a red flag about the man’s credibility?

Gullible’s Travels

Tom Voigt has taken his family on a week long vacation, touring Zodiac’s gruesome crime scenes. Doesn’t that sound like the disturbing behavior people are trying but unable to find in Richard Gaikowski’s personality?

Can’t wait for all of Blaine’s new revelations!


Reply to comments


A commenter to my last post wrote “Tom is also very quick to curtail posts concerning discredited information, even when he was the original source.”

I appreciate your defense of the well intentioned members of the forum but are you sure about Tom being quick to curtail posts? The now discredited allegations about Richard Gaikowski, implying that the mugshot was connected to an altercation with Ferrin, are still on the introductory post. Can’t you see how it deceptively sways the novice reader toward Richard Gaikowski’s guilt? The other circumstantial evidence that follows becomes icing on the cake but there is no longer a cake under the icing. Do you see what I mean?

There is more evidence against Blaine than there is against Richard Gaikowski. Blaine claims to have witnessed a Zodiac murder. He claims to be in possession of a victim’s book. Why is it absurd to question someone who claims to know Zodiac?

Doesn’t it seem that Voigt is getting desperate and sloppy? He peaked in 2005 with a movie credit, a radio interview and a busy internet forum. It’s been all downhill since then. His decade-long investment has not panned out. It was time to admit failure or find a new suspect.

Tom wanted something big to happen for the tenth anniversary of his site and he knew Purple Blaine could deliver the goods.

Bystander

7 Responses leave one →
  1. 2008 April 6
    Anonymous permalink

    Which screwbie are you? SuperDaveOsborn? Baba Bijan? Carl? Kaufman? Graysmith?

    Intelligence or GTFO.

  2. 2008 April 6
    Anonymous permalink

    Tom Voigt, I think, is too young to have committed the Zodiac crimes. But if you’re talking motive, I think “hit count” wouldn’t be too far off the mark.

  3. 2008 April 7
    Anonymous permalink

    Eh. Smells like Sacramento spirit to me. Hi, Dennis. LOL

  4. 2009 March 9

    i agree with you!

  5. 2009 March 18

    You did it! …How did you do it?

  6. 2009 April 30
    Anonymous permalink

    I knew Richard Gaikowski. I also know Blaine. The backstory is that Blaine wanted to write for Good Times back when Richard was managing editor. His writing was rejected by R.G.. Factor in a healthy dose of drug addled dissapation and paranoia and you have Blaine’s case against Gaikowski.

  7. 2009 May 25

    I appreciate your point of view.

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS