This post can be considered Part Three of the series Dennis Kaufman’s Photo Chicanery

Dennis Kaufman’s Photo Chicanery – Part One

Dennis Kaufman’s Photo Chicanery – Part Two

If you haven't already, you might want to read Dennis Kaufman’s Photo Chicanery – Part One before reading the following post. You don't have to, though.

Dennis Kaufman turned over three rolls of film to the FBI. They gave them back and said they were nothing more than family photos. But, Dennis hasn't given up, yet. He gave more photos to Dr. Stephen Dewhurst to develop and has even had some of the photos published on TV and the Internet. But, are these photos images of murder or "snuff film"?

I have been seeking information about the case of Gladys Gresham. So far, the only information I have is what may be found at CBS13, with whom a Dr. Dewhurst had spoken with back in April of this year. Apparently, Dewhurst was a family friend of Gresham's.

I'm not a journalist. I don't approach topics with objectivity while distancing myself from any judgment. That just isn't me. I say what I think within my domain, and in other places around the Net. Often, this puts me at odds with others. Then, it begins to look like I am close-minded and resistant to allowing the presentation of opposing points of view. I assure you this is not the case.

Ms. Barto has provided ZodiacKillerTRUTH.com with her report on the handwriting of Guy Ward Hendrickson as compared to that of the Zodiac Killer. It is provided here for your consideration.

The first file is in Excel format. If you do not have Microsoft Office, I recommend that you use OpenOffice.org or the free Microsoft Excel Viewer.

Exemplar Comparisons

Note: Some readers have failed to recognize that this letter has been posted at face value and does not reflect the viewpoint of this site or its webmaster, Chris Yarbrough. That being the case, allow me to reiterate: I am not in support of Janice Hendrickson or Nanette Barto. I do not support or endorse any viewpoints expressed within my domains that have not been exclusively authored by me. I have allowed ample space for public commentary and alternative points of view. I cannot force people to share their opinion.

I apologized to Nanette Barto because I made a bad joke. I sent an email. It was an attempt at humor. I realized it might not be received at such, so I sent another asking that it be ignored. This is what I have apologized for. I was sincere when I apologized, and I'm sincere now. I'm not trying to diminish or retract that apology. Unlike some, I am capable of admitting when I am wrong. But, the two emails (mainly the first) are pretty much the extent of anything that may have bothered my conscience.

Most of us researching the Zodiac case view the Zodiac letters mainly via two means. We can view the images in books, like Robert Graysmith's Zodiac and Zodiac Unmasked. Many of us view them on our computers from sites like Tom Voigt's ZodiacKiller.com. Not many of of us has had the opportunity to view the actual letters. So, in the transmission of these images from their original source to how they are viewed by our eyes, it is only natural that there are some issues that need to be considered.