Unsolved '66: How to Spot Zodiac Killer Propaganda Part III

Recently, I revealed how Chicago Magazine (presumably by way of an HBO documentary) lied regarding what a witness saw in a 1960 triple murder case in Illinois:

https://tinyurl.com/4vkekt43

And that this appears to have been done in an ongoing effort to cover up that William Thoresen III was the Zodiac Killer. Suspiciously, and not surprisingly, at the time of this writing, Chicago magazine had removed that story from the web. 

Meanwhile, what appears to be a propagandistic book series,The Zodiac Revisited, appeared. It purportedly is a self-published work by an author named Michael F. Cole. (perhaps the F stands for Fed.) 

Each “Revisited” book seems to be too short to justify being released as a series and is priced so cheap to make little sense economically. Perhaps most important, the series appears to have no reason to exist (i.e. it does not claim to break new ground by revealing a new suspect) except perhaps to distract the public from a book that does. Yet it supposedly won (and nearly won) a bunch of awards that couldn’t sound more bogus. 

And there’s another giveaway. Though the series has purportedly won numerous awards, I have not been able to locate a single review for any of the books that appear that was written by a professional writer or journalist. 

As one who self-published a book on the Zodiac case that actually did garner some press, I know that this does not make sense. In other words, aside from the bio that appears for Cole in places like Amazon and at Goodreads dot com, I can find nothing that proves that Cole actually exists. Without such press it does not add up that the first “Revisited” book has thus far (in a little over two years) earned 105 ratings and 25 written reader reviews at Goodreads. 

“Micheal F. Cole”, purported author of “The Zodiac Revisited” Book Series.

It is not credible that the series won a bunch of awards and garnered many reader reviews yet, it appears, no journalists found them to be worth writing about or reviewing. So what explains the reader’s reviews?, which sound as contrived as the awards that the series purportedly won. 

One sees the same general terms in them over and over. The books in the “Revisited” series are “well written”, and “well-researched” and are “in depth”. Not only are these terms, without any specific supporting information near worthless, the reviews appear to be padded for length with mentions other cases that have nothing to do with the Zodiac murders. And they’re full of mentions about how much the reviewers like true crime, etcetera. This is further reason to believe that everything about the “Revisited” series is fraudulent. 

 There is no rational explanation for why such obvious propaganda continues to appear (and in the case of the Chicago Magazine article disappear) most than a half century after the final Zodiac murder except that it proves that the case was, and continues to be, covered up.