San Francisco, CA– The former law partner of divorce attorney to the stars- Melvin Belli has conducted a 2 year investigation into claims made by an Orange County Realtor that her father, Guy Ward Hendrickson, is the Zodiac Killer.

Deborah Perez came forward on the steps of the San Francisco Chronicle this afternoon:

Read the rest at Blink on Crime:

Posted April 30, 2009 by
Crime, Murder, Sex Offender | 5 comments

If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • Texas EquuSearch Finds Nate Hendrickson’s Body in George Bush Park
  • Scared Monkeys Radio Daily Commentary – Tuesday, September 2, 2008 – Copycat “Zodiac Killer” Helps Find The Original Offender
  • Missing Persons in the News (Texas EquuSearch)
  • More Rantings From Ward
  • Not So Fast Ward, Maybe No Re”WARD” After All

  • Comments


    1. EURobert on April 30th, 2009 5:37 pm

      Would love to see that one solved; a MYTHICAL series of murders. Very intriguing!
      Just read he claimed to have 37 people killed! But only 5 proven to be killed by him.

    2. JANICE HENDRICKSON on July 5th, 2009 12:25 am


      jang9333@aol.com JANICE HENDRICKSON, CALIF.

    3. LEWATCH on July 14th, 2009 12:30 pm

      second option provided to Nanatte Barto

      2.3 A review of Nanette Barto’s handwriting comparison.

      On May 20, 2009 Dennis Kaufman announced that a court qualified questioned document examiner had confirmed a match between the handwriting of Jack Tarrance and the Zodiac Killer. This self professed QDE, Nanette Barto, provided two files, posted to Kaufman’s website, in support of her opinion.

      Barto’s report consisted of a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet titled EZcourtprepworksheet, showing 52 comparisons, and a Microsoft Word document titled NB50-3-11-Zodiac-Jack Tarrance Report, that contains a short background statement, her 7 point opinion and 48 short summary statements of her comparisons shown on the spreadsheet.

      Addressed here, in the order they appear in her opinion, is my analysis of her comparison and my opinion based on my independent comparisons. Box # references are to Barto’s spreadsheet. The spreadsheet is attached without permission, as an appendix to this report.

      Box #1, both authors use a cursive lower case Q in the middle of hand printing.

      Barto provides 5 exemplars from Jack and 6 from Zodiac. Both use a cursive style lower case q presumably in printed writing (though this is unclear due to the cropping). Jack terminates his q after crossing the down stroke just below the head. Zodiac terminates the q at the point where the down stroke meets the head, as if he were drawing a crooked 8, in 5 of the 6 exemplars and in the 6th he terminates much lower and with virtually no loop.

      Box #2, 3, 4, and 5 both authors show a unique th both in connection strokes and letter formation in their hand printing. There are tick marks at the bottom of the h; it also has a hard left slant on the right side of the hump, and a stem that hovers over to the right.

      Five exemplars are presented from Jack and 6 from Zodiac. These exemplars are all of a capital T followed by a lower case h. In every Zodiac exemplar the cross bar of the capital T terminates at or just after, but always touching, the top of the h. Of the 5 Jack exemplars only 1 follows this pattern with the rest terminating at or just before the h and below the top of the h.

      The angles of the T and H in all but one Jack exemplar are different, with T standing straight or very slightly forward with H slanted forward aggressively. The angles of the T and H in every Zodiac exemplar are parallel.

      Box #6, h’s that carry the same traits as listed in the th connections above.

      Same as above.

      Box #7, ss construction is within natural variation.

      Natural variation describes consistency within a given sample and accounts for imprecision of the motor memories as they are executed on repeated occasions. For Barto to say that the ss construction is within natural variation with no other analysis is to presuppose that the authors are indeed the same, a conclusion that should not be considered until the analysis is complete.

      Overall construction appears quite different. Tarrance’s entry and terminal strokes tend to be more horizontal, forming a very traditional printed s. Zodiac only forms the s in this manner in one example. In all other examples the entry and terminal strokes are more vertical forming the atypical lighting bolt s.

      Box #8, b’s that are formed with one stroke and are at the same slant with the same ending disposition by both authors.

      In all 7 Jack exemplars, the entry stroke is followed by an upstroke that follows the initial stroke up approximately one third of the stroke before it separates to form the b. Five of those exemplars end the stroke at the bottom of the entry stroke.

      In 5 of the 8 Zodiac exemplars (all apparently from the Citizen Letter of May 1974) the upstroke to form the bulge of the B does not trace up the down stroke, rather it angles away and does not close or closes the loop up the loop from the bottom of the down stroke. The remaining 3 exemplars are actually much more representative of Zodiacs b construction as shown in my own analysis earlier in this document. In fact it shows quite clearly that Zodiac formed his typical b with 2 separate strokes and not 1 as claimed by Barto.

      Box #9, cursive writing found on the envelope to Riverside K24, shows a disconnection from the ending letter d; this is consistent with all of Jack’s cursive writing.

      In fact it is completely inconsistent with Jack’s cursive d. The Jack exemplars provided all start the d with a downward stroke, suggesting that the author lifted the pen to start the d similar to a printed d construction rather than cursive. The Riverside exemplar, not a definitive Zodiac document in my opinion, begins with an upward stroke suggesting a writer who lifted the pen but continued a normal “i” to “d” cursive stroke.

      Box #10, here you will see the number 2 executed by both authors; they contain a tick mark at the top of the entrance stroke, and the exit stroke is consistent.

      This is a speculative leap of faith at best, based on a single exemplar. The tick on the Jack exemplar is a looped construction, while the Zodiac exemplar is a single straight-line tick and isn’t even clearly a part of the entrance stroke at all. The exit stroke of the Zodiac exemplar is not clear enough to make any determination.

      Box #11, these are power source symbols used in both the bus bombing diagram and many of the diagrams I found of Jack’s.

      I found several thousand matches to this symbol in five seconds with google. I believe she is attempting to justify her determination that Jack and Zodiac shared a gestalt in writing. I choose not to address her graphology-based opinions here for reasons I outlined in the introduction to this report.

      Box #12, the Bat on the diagrams of both signifying battery.

      This is arguably the most common abbreviation for battery. This appears to be another attempt at showing that Jack and Zodiac wrote about the same things, rather than an analysis of the allograph construction.

      Box #13, letter k by both authors match in form, and slant is consistent with buckle and stem.

      It is interesting that Barto presents only 2 Tarrance and 3 Zodiac exemplars here in her comparison and then later presents 11 Tarrance and 5 Zodiac exemplars for a separate comparison.

      Zodiac’s first letter contains 6 exemplars on the first page alone. His k is consistent in construction throughout his handwriting as a three-stroke character. Zodiac only deviated from this to form his two stroke K inside his ciphers.

      Aside from Tarrance curved construction of his K, his construction is within the construction of a larger allograph, while Zodiac is constructing a stand-alone character, where characteristics caused by entry from a preceding character and exit to a following character would not exist.

      Box # 14, 15, and 16, letter is consistent in form and slant; also, there are noticeable ticks marks on the bottom and the tops of the stems of each author.

      Although the form, slant and tick marks appear similar, this is hardly a good analysis. Lets go back to natural variance here. There will always be small differences in a persons writing, but typically when common combination are made, the differences will be minimized. This is not the case between the double f exemplars presented here. One would expect that if Jack and Zodiac were the same author, that these double ff exemplars would be indistinguishable by the amateur.

      A deeper look at the consistency of the f’s as they either precede a vowel or follow one, we see dramatic differences between the authors spacing and the height of the cross bar. These differences definitely do not fall within natural variance.

      Box #17, L’s are executed at a slant it creates a v shape point in the bottom left corner of the L.

      Most of the Jack exemplars have a strange hump in the exit stroke that none of the Zodiac exemplars has.

      Box #18, G’s these are the curly version of Jack’s that match the one in K26 and the G’s made in the ciphers.

      Only 1 exemplar of Jack matches the Zodiac exemplars. All of the other Jack Gs entrance stroke starts down and loops back around and exits in a down stroke. Zodiacs entrance stroke generally starts up and does not create a loop and exits to the right.

      The capital G is the most distinctive letter in determining individuality of handwriting. The lack of a match here speaks volumes.

      Box #19, lower case g’s are formed with same single stroke motion and have identical slants.

      All of the Jack exemplars are created with a single stroke, the exit stroke terminating in a straight stem much like the number 9. The Zodiac exemplars on the other hand are also formed of a single stroke, but exit with a gentle curve on the stem like a classic printed lower case g.

      Box #20, cursive r’s as shown in the Riverside letter K24, they have the same slant.

      The authorship of the Riverside letter is not certain, therefore it cannot be used in any honest comparison.

      Box #21, shows the circle in both authors diagrams, the ending stroke is consistent.

      This is perhaps the least useful comparison that I found, and has almost no value at all in a comparison of handwriting.

      Box #22, show the use of large and rounded capital letters that Jack forms in cursive. This variation of writing is connected to K24.

      The authorship of the Riverside letter is not certain, therefore it cannot be used in any honest comparison.

      Box # 23, Capital B’s are made with a smaller bottom bowl and larger upper bowl.

      The capital B’s are quite dissimilar. Zodiac consistently begins the terminal stroke of his capital B at the beginning of the entry stroke of the stem. Tarrance consistently begins his terminal stroke will above the top of the stem.

      Box #24, the construction of the M’s are done in several strokes by both authors.

      The exemplars presented are the most atypical of Zodiac’s capital M. Even with this obviously dishonest omission, there is very little in the construction of these characters that are similar. Zodiac’s very straight entry strokes contrast dramatically against Tarrance’s curved entry and exit.

      Box #25, K’s done by both authors are a match is stroke, formation and slant. As found in

      An intra-sample comparison of Zodiac writing indicates that allograph construction in his ciphers are quite different from and in no way representative of his handwriting. Even so, the exemplars presented are again, quite dissimilar. As usual Mr. Tarrance brings a great deal of curve to his stroke, that does not exist in Zodiac writing.

      Ms. Barto’s report continues to present approximately 20 more “comparisons”, none of which are any more convincing that the previous 25. I can provide my analysis of those as well, but I suppose people’s eyes are bleeding already from this marathon of a post.

      Based on my analysis my opinion is that there is sufficient evidence that Jack Tarrance did not author the Zodiac documents. This, however, does not exclude Mr. Tarrance as the perpetrator of the Zodiac crimes.


    4. JANICE HENDRICKSON on July 16th, 2009 11:54 pm

      It has been written that a handwriting analist said my father could not be the Zodiac killer. I know that Nanette Barto was trained, her mentor being Bart Bagget, in his University on line. If you go look she is listed on the roster there. She is near certification,and I have confidence in her findings. I also know that my dad was never the Zodiac killer ,who was supposed to be taking Debra Perez, who also told her former boss, and others, that she is the illegit daughter of PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY, I THINK YOU CAN ALL GET THE PICTURE, EVEN WITHOUT A HANDWRTING ANALIST.
      Thank you, Janice Hendrickson/Guy Ward’s natural daughter by blood/ not adopted. 7/17/09

    5. Assisted Living Riverside on January 4th, 2010 6:17 am

      Would love to see that one solved; a MYTHICAL series of murders. Very intriguing!
      Just read he claimed to have 37 people killed! But only 5 proven to be killed by him.

    Leave a Reply

    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
    E-mail It