Show notes & source index

"Zodiac and Black Dahlia Solved! By Sherlock or Charlatan?"

A companion reference for the video series by David Oranchak, indexing claims made in the videos to their underlying sources. Jump to editorial disclaimer & correction policy ↓

1. Purpose of this page ↑ Back to top

This page collects, in one place, the citations behind claims made in a three-part video series (plus several short-form videos) examining public statements made by Alex Baber, a self-described cold case investigator, about his role in the Zodiac Killer and Black Dahlia cases. The videos are the primary content; this page exists so viewers, journalists, and platforms evaluating Baber's claims can trace each factual assertion back to its source without having to scrub through hours of footage.

Every numbered citation[0] in this document links to a specific video, article, or document. Where a claim rests on witness testimony rather than a public record, that is stated explicitly, along with how many independent sources corroborate it. This page does not assert that Baber has been convicted of any crime; where legal or financial disputes are referenced, they are described as disputes, filings, or licensing records — not findings of guilt.

Michael Connelly, a bestselling crime novelist, wrote, produced, and narrates Killer in the Code, a commercial podcast built around Baber's investigation, and brought retired LAPD detectives Mitzi Roberts and Rick Jackson on to publicly endorse Baber's findings.[1] Both have also long worked as Connelly's paid consultants on his Bosch and Ballard novels and their TV adaptations — a financial relationship worth weighing against the independence of their endorsement.[2] Cryptographer Ed Giorgio's cryptanalysis, also featured on the podcast, is described by Connelly himself as validating only the "internal consistency" of a method that already assumed Baber's candidate, Marvin Margolis — not an independent test of Baber's conclusions or Margolis's guilt.[3] No fully independent review of Baber's conclusions has been publicly documented.

2. The video series ↑ Back to top

Full episodes:

Part 1 — The Codebreaking Part 2 — The Evidence Part 3 — The Investigator

Short-form clips (individual examples):

Z340 contradictions Story about discovering name doesn't add up Deception about suspect's son Baber hides his past

Independent reporting that raised related questions about the underlying case claims (not produced by this channel):

Baber's response and his account of these events are published on his own Substack: cccoa.substack.com. Readers are encouraged to review it directly.

3. Claims specific to the current investigation ↑ Back to top

These are the claims examined in Part 3 that relate most directly to Baber's current Zodiac/Black Dahlia investigation. Each is followed, where available, by Baber's response.

Self-contradiction — strongest documented claim

Z340 cipher: "I got verification I was the first one to solve it" vs. "I have never claimed to have solved Z340"

In 2020, Baber posted publicly that he had solved the Z340 cipher "6+ months" before it was solved and announced by an independent team (David Oranchak, Sam Blake, and Jarl Van Eycke) in December 2020, writing "wait until the entire story is out."[4] On a livestream roughly two months before that public solve, Baber described a partial decryption and stated on camera that he had gotten "verification I was the first one to solve it."[5] Years later, in a written message to Oranchak, Baber stated: "I have never claimed to have solved Z340; my focus at the time was limited to the ciphers previously noted which excluded Z13."[6]

These three statements — an archived public post, on-camera livestream footage, and a direct written denial — are all in Baber's own words and are mutually exclusive. This claim does not depend on any third party's account.

In a September 15, 2026 YouTube comment, Baber added a further admission about his own engagement with Z340 shortly before the December 2020 solve: "I believed it to be constructed in four sections and not three just a short time before the methodology was identified. I was wrong—and I own that."[7]

Timeline discrepancy

Timing of the Marvin Margolis / "Marvin Merrill" identification

Baber has described identifying Marvin Skipton Margolis (also referred to as "Marvin Merrill") as a suspect only after decoding the Zodiac's "Z13" cipher, and has said he "had no idea" who Marvin Merrill was before that.[8] Research materials reviewed for this series[9][10] — including a 2019 email exchange[11] with a contributor who says he informed Baber of the Margolis/Merrill connection — indicate Baber was promoting Margolis as a suspect as early as 2019.

Baber's responseThe researcher is acknowledged by Baber to have assisted with early Margolis/Lawrence Kane research; Baber states this involvement "has been publicly disclosed and documented" and that the overall investigation "extended well beyond those efforts."[12]
Timeline discrepancy

When Baber says he first contacted his suspect's son

Baber has stated he contacted his suspect's son — whose identity is withheld here — in 2024 under false pretenses before later revealing his true intentions, and has separately said he tracked the son down through genealogy research and social media. Footage reviewed from a 2021 interview shows Baber describing having already secured that individual's cooperation by 2021 or earlier, using the son's and a step-brother's first names.[13] It is not clear why Baber had to use false pretenses in 2024 to secure the son's cooperation when he claimed in 2021 he already had it.

Direct comparison to the primary forensic report

The "Elizabeth" sketch: what the Reis report actually says, vs. how it has been represented

Baber commissioned forensic imaging examiner George Reis, of Imaging Forensics, to analyze a sketch of a topless woman labeled "ELIZABETH" and signed "Marty Merrill '92,"[14] to determine whether writing was present in a shaded area of the drawing. Reis's report, dated January 13, 2026, is now available in full and can be compared directly against Baber's public characterizations of it.[15]

What the report says Reis actually did: he tested the sketch with 45-degree lighting, raking light, back illumination, ultraviolet light, and infrared light — and states plainly that "none of these methods resulted in significant results." The only technique that revealed anything was co-axial illumination,[16] a specialized method using a coated two-way mirror to send light along the camera's optical path — equipment and a technique not available to an ordinary phone camera or consumer app.

What the report says was found: using co-axial lighting, Reis identified marks "consistent with letters" in the area above the "T" in "ELIZABETH" — describing the left-most mark as "appearing to be the letter Z" and the right-most as "the letter C," with a mark between them "that could be another C or a lower-case A," and additional markings in between that he calls "less distinct." The report never states that the word "ZODIAC" was found, confirmed, or read in full — its conclusion is limited to a few individually hedged, partially-legible letter fragments.

The deviation: Baber has publicly described this material as showing the word "ZODIAC" hidden in the sketch, and has at various times attributed the discovery to his own use of a "contrast spectrum" technique. Baber has not corroborated the process he says he personally used to see "ZODIAC" in the sketch before commissioning this report, and the report he cites as validation does not confirm that word was ever there.

Media claims

Claims about interest from People, Vanity Fair, and The Times of London

Baber has said Vanity Fair and People Magazine were prepared to run cover stories on his findings, and that The Times of London arranged an international photoshoot. Direct statements gathered from individuals at those outlets — quoted at length in Part 3 — describe declining to run stories because his claims were not considered credible or evidence-backed, and, in People Magazine's case, objecting to Baber publicizing an unconfirmed story using their name.[17]

Baber's responseBaber disputes this characterization and states he has "emails, text messages, and video recordings" that contradict it, and that a Times of London photoshoot did take place at the U.S. Capitol on March 3, 2026. [18]
CorrectionThis page previously reported that a contact at The Times (London) denied any coverage of Baber. That was mistaken: the contact had given Oranchak inaccurate information at the time, and The Times did in fact publish a story. This correction is noted here in the interest of accuracy, consistent with this page's correction policy below. Sources at People and Vanity Fair continue to confirm that they declined to cover Baber's problematic story.

4. A pattern predating the current investigation ↑ Back to top

Beyond the claims specific to the Margolis investigation, the series documents a longer pattern of disputed or contradicted statements about Baber's background:

Sockpuppet accounts

Accounts defending Baber online that appear connected to him

"Dahlila Short" (Facebook): a profile using the display name "Dahlila Short" — an evident allusion to "Dahlia" and Black Dahlia victim Elizabeth Short — has posted in defense of Baber and his business, including "CCCOA helped my family... this appears to be a hate campaign," and a five-star review of "Cold Case Consultants of America, LLC" praising Baber's "linguistic database" as "ingenious."[32] The profile lists a birthdate of July 27, 1924 — two days from Elizabeth Short's actual birthdate of July 29, 1924 — and lists its hometown as Medford, Massachusetts, which matches Elizabeth Short's real childhood home. Most directly: the account's own Facebook URL is facebook.com/alex.baber.73/ — the account's underlying identifier is Baber's own name, regardless of its display name.[33]

"@JackDoeland" (YouTube): a YouTube commenter using this handle has repeatedly defended Baber in the third person while displaying extremely detailed insider-level knowledge of his claims and disputes.[34] In a private Facebook Messenger conversation with Oranchak on January 3, 2026, Baber himself used the uncommon word "distractors" in place of the standard word "detractors" — e.g., "Imagine if Einstein had listened to his distractors?"[35] The same non-standard word choice appears in at least three separate @JackDoeland comments posted over several months: "nobody outside of a handful of distractors, few are falling for your smear campaign anymore"; "a development that has clearly intensified the response from the few distractors there are"; and "the investigation and cipher solution are being dismissed appears to stem from Baber's prior opposition to these few distractors."[36]

This page does not assert as settled fact that Baber personally operates either account. What can be stated directly: one account's own URL identifies it with Baber's name, and a distinctive, non-standard word choice (or eggcorn) appears identically in Baber's own private words and in a separate public account's repeated defenses of him.

6. Source testimony and corroboration ↑ Back to top

A substantial portion of the personal-conduct claims examined in the series come from individual sources rather than public records. In a July 15, 2026 exchange, Baber himself acknowledged the volume of this testimony, while disputing its accuracy: Oranchak told him the claims came from "dozens of people... many of whom never met each other but tell very similar stories," and that this pattern of independent, unprompted convergence — not any single source — is what the reporting relies on.[42]

Consistent with standard sourcing practice, this page and the underlying videos distinguish between:

Baber was given the opportunity to respond to each specific allegation prior to publication and did so point-by-point; his responses are represented throughout this page and in full on his Substack.[43]

7. Relevance to prospective media and production partners ↑ Back to top

Several outlets and production entities that previously engaged with Baber's claims — including People Magazine, Vanity Fair, The Times of London, and DreamEmpire Films — are described in the source material as having stepped back from projects involving him, citing credibility concerns or disputes over the terms of the collaboration.[17][44] Separately, two established cold-case organizations have stated in writing that Baber has no track record with them despite his public "cold case consultant" branding.[30] Any organization evaluating a documentary, news feature, book, or partnership involving Baber's claims should independently verify factual assertions — particularly claims of law-enforcement confirmation, forensic validation, prior institutional affiliation, or family cooperation — before relying on them, given the documented instances above in which such claims did not hold up to direct inquiry.

9. Outstanding questions about Baber's investigation ↑ Back to top

The following are specific, unresolved questions about Baber's investigation and his background, raised during the research for this series and, in many cases, put to Baber directly. They are grouped into categories below; the numbering runs continuously across all categories. Where a question is examined in more detail elsewhere on this page, that section is linked; where an existing citation applies, it is included.

Evidence behind the Merrill/Margolis identification

  • Baber has stated, on camera and on multiple occasions, that he first learned the name "Merrill" through decoding the Z13 cipher. What accounts for research materials indicating earlier awareness of the Margolis/Merrill connection? (Examined in detail under Recent claims.)[8][11][12]

    Responding to a comment, Baber wrote: "You keep returning to one line about Margolis as Merrill in 2024 as if it were the whole case. It is not. The record of how that identification developed is already public. He was investigated years ago as a Black Dahlia suspect and as a possible connection to Zodiac suspect Lawrence Kane, based on historical records. That documentation was in what you disrespectfully call my "vaporware." When the Z13 data was uploaded, Merrill was just another name among thousands, and that alias—one of his 20-plus—was flagged as pre-existing. Margolis/Kane was a theory I developed, later challenged, and disproved years ago, and I have owned that. That is called taking accountability for an error."[46]

  • Baber has attributed the discovery of letters in the "Elizabeth" sketch to his own use of a "peeling off contrast spectrum" process. The Reis report identifies co-axial illumination — a technique performed by the examiner, not demonstrated by Baber — as the only method that produced results. What is the basis for Baber's description of his own process? (Examined in detail under Recent claims.)[15][16]

    Correction An earlier version of this question also attributed an "infrared" claim to Baber himself. That wasn't Baber's own wording — it came from the podcast's narration. Killer in the Code, Episode 2 (Michael Connelly narrating), states flatly: "This non-invasive imaging is technically known as infrared reflectography... When Baber applied this technique to the Elizabeth sketch... he found a single word hidden beneath the dark shading... That hidden word was Zodiac." The Reis report Baber commissioned lists infrared explicitly among the methods that produced no significant results, and the method that did work — co-axial illumination — bears no resemblance to "infrared reflectography." Connelly's narration appears to have introduced the "infrared" description in error; it is not a technique Baber has been shown to claim as his own.[47]

  • The Killer in the Code podcast has stated that Reis concluded the word "Zodiac" was present in the sketch. Why does the report itself stop short of that conclusion, describing only a few individually hedged, partially legible letter fragments?[48][15][16]
  • Why are there two different versions of the "Zodiac" signature attributed to the sketch?[49]

    Responding to a comment, Baber wrote that "Rachel explained how they approached the castle to document the sketch in their own photographs which they then processed."[50] Daily Mail reporter Rachel Sharp describes that process directly, in her own words: "We took pictures of it as well. Obviously Alex did such technical investigation of the artwork — we actually managed to use very simple photo technology to just enhance the image, and we also got the same, the Zodiac image, the Zodiac word underneath as well."[51]

    Later in the same comment thread, however, Baber gave a different account of that same image's origin: "The cropped green-based image on the Killer in the Code site is from the analysis. I believed there was writing. Others were sent to examine it independently, and they confirmed it. They then went to the location with a group that included a cold-case detective and documented it. DM then went, documented it, and ran their own analysis for their articles."[52] This reverses the sequence he gave earlier in the very same thread: there, the Killer in the Code image traced back to the Daily Mail's own reproduction of Baber's process; here, it instead traces back to unnamed "others" and an unnamed "cold-case detective," with the Daily Mail's documentation recast as a separate, later step done "for their articles."

    Baber later went back and edited an earlier reply higher up in the same thread — one posted before either of the accounts above — to add a flat assertion of his own: "ONLY image of 'ZoDiac' on KITC is ours—not the Daily Mail's."[101] That addition agrees with his "others"/"cold-case detective" account above (ref [52]) that the Daily Mail didn't produce the Killer in the Code image, but it directly contradicts the "castle" account (ref [50]), in which the Killer in the Code image traced back to the Daily Mail's own reproduction of his process.

  • Baber has stated that no photographs, notes, or other materials were attached to the back of the "Elizabeth" sketch. Why has he also described sketches of neckties found behind it?[53]
  • Baber's investigation relies on the premise that Marvin Merrill is the creator of the "Elizabeth" sketch. How does he explain Marvin's niece who claims her father's artwork was stolen by his brother Marvin?[54]
  • Why was handwriting analysis comparing Merrill's writing to Zodiac correspondence conducted using copies of the documents rather than originals?[55]
  • How could the same document examiner, described in 2021 as the top handwriting analyst in the world, attribute the Zodiac letters to suspect Klein, and in 2025 attribute the same letters to suspect Merrill? Killer in the Code attributes its strongest, unhedged handwriting conclusion to an examiner it does not name — is that unnamed examiner Curt Baggett, or someone else? If not Baggett, who is it?[56]
  • Can documentation be produced for a claimed 18- to 19-point fingerprint match connecting suspect Klein to the "Lipstick Killer" case (for which William Heirens was convicted)?[28]
  • Baber has said he had a fingerprint match between latent prints on Bryan Hartnell's car door at Lake Berryessa and Klein. How is this reconciled with Klein having reportedly already been checked twice against all latent print evidence in the Zodiac case?[57][58]
  • The weapon used at Lake Berryessa is described in the autopsy and by eyewitnesses as a double-sided knife roughly 12 inches long. The bayonet Baber attributes to Merrill is single-sided and over 20 inches. How is this discrepancy explained?[59][60]
  • Why has the bayonet been shown publicly only through photographs sourced from the internet, rather than as the physical item itself?[61]
  • Why was bayonet evidence presented via Daily Mail and Impact Nightline but not mentioned at all on Killer in the Code?[62]

    On his Substack, Baber addressed this question directly: "While other production variants of the Type 30 bayonet did exist, the widespread use of the Circle 8 marking during the final years of the war increased the likelihood that it was the same type Marvin Margolis returned with, although the issue initially remained open to debate. However, the evidentiary significance increased substantially after Margolis’s son identified the exact model as matching the bayonet his father owned. As for the bayonet not being addressed during Season One of Michael Connelly’s Killer in the Code, our investigators were actively attempting to secure the original for potential forensic testing at the time. Details surrounding the weapon are expected to be covered in Season Two."[105]

    That account — that the original bayonet was still being sought "at the time" of Season One — is difficult to reconcile with a July 2025 Facebook comment, also attributed to Baber, which describes the item as already recovered, documented, and handed off to law enforcement: "At that point, a descendant realized they had, for decades, unknowingly been in possession of physical evidence related to the case—this ties directly into the earlier mention regarding other potent sources of DNA outside of envelopes—particularly victims. We immediately documented and photographed the materials before transferring them to California law enforcement, who are now leading the investigation."[104] Jaime Gomez, however, states that the raid in which California law enforcement actually obtained the bayonet from the Margolis/Merrill family did not occur until November 2025[106] — four months after the July 2025 comment already describes the evidence as documented, photographed, and transferred to investigators.

  • Coverage of Baber's investigation refers to the bayonet in a 1945 news article about Marvin Margolis' service in WWII. But the article neither mentions a bayonet nor depicts one. What is the explanation for this discrepancy?[63]
  • A business card has been presented as evidence placing Merrill in Santa Clara in the late 1960s. How is this reconciled with the address on the card reportedly not existing until 1977?[64]
  • Why does Marvin's mouth appear to differ between versions of a photograph Baber has presented, given his denial of altering any facial features?[65]

    Responding to a follow-up comment, Baber wrote: "No one altered the “pose” of his mouth by design, David. The 1955 photograph was given a slight age-progression—hair trimmed, rimmed glasses added—so it could be compared to the later wanted poster with reasonable accuracy. Underlying features and facial structure were left untouched, and the fact that an enhancement was used was disclosed from day one even if the newspapers and interviews minimized or excluded some of the specifics. And Contrary to your point, the 1955 photo arguably shows lips that sit closer to the Stine sketch than the enhanced version does. Most people looking at both images without a bone to pick would likely acknowledge that. We may even have done the investigation a disservice by not addressing that negative effect at the time, but then it wouldn’t have been a fair comparison. Any question of “mouth pose” is moot at this point. The later 1960s photographs have been obtained, confirming the hairline and glasses similarity superseding any enhanced version. And not publishing every single detail is not unusual in an investigation. You were offered the opportunity of a full review and respectfully declined. There is no need to split hairs now."

  • A 1950 census search using a filter for California residency has been cited as how Merrill was located. How is this reconciled with Merrill reportedly living in Chicago, under the name Marvin Margolis, at the time?[66]
  • It has been said that a Zodiac-related event occurred everywhere Merrill went[67], even though all confirmed Zodiac crimes occurred in the North Bay Area. What is the closest documented distance between Merrill and a Zodiac crime or letter-mailing location within the relevant timeframe?[68]
  • A vehicle owned by the Merrill family has been described as the "exact vehicle" witnessed at Lake Berryessa. How is this reconciled with witness accounts describing California plates on the vehicle at the scene, while the Merrill family's vehicle carried Louisiana plates and was sold roughly four months after the cited 1971 arrest date?[69]
  • Baber claims the "Zodiac Motel" had a bath which was rare for motels at that time. But when responding to the Talestorm documentary's claims, he shows classified ads of several motels featuring baths. How does he explain this discrepancy?[70]
  • Baber has repeatedly stated anagrams are not valid solutions to the Zodiac ciphers[71]. But why does he now claim that Merrill allegedly encrypted multiple messages in a single cipher using anagrams?[72]

Circumstances of the investigation

  • Why was a story about conducting WWII research reportedly needed to gain Merrill's son's cooperation in 2024, when Baber has separately said he already had that cooperation as of 2021? (Examined in detail under Recent claims.)[13]. When did Baber contact Merrill's son with the pretense that he was conducting WWII research?

    Asked directly in a YouTube comment, "why did you go and interview Merrill's son under false pretenses too?", Baber replied: "The son was aware of who we were before we ever sat down with him. That was established on the record during the interview itself. Please stop posting unfounded accusations."[73] That denial doesn't sit easily alongside Killer in the Code's own account of the same meeting (ref [13]): Baber describes needing to present himself to the son under a cover story about World War II research just to get him to respond at all, and Michael Connelly's narration says Baber "quickly came clean" about "the real reason for the meeting" only afterward. The podcast's account is ambiguous about exactly when that reveal happened relative to the son "sitting down" with Baber, though — it could be read as happening once the meeting was arranged but before they sat down together, or as happening during the sit-down itself — so it isn't a clean-cut contradiction of Baber's later claim that the son "was aware of who we were before we ever sat down with him."

    Jaime Gomez, who once worked with Baber on a documentary project, states Baber told him the WWII pretense was needed to secure the in-person meeting, and Baber's true intention was not revealed until during the meeting.

    Responding to a separate comment (thread now deleted), Baber wrote: "On Merrill’s son: you’re collapsing first contact around the Klein connection, later approach and cooperation on BD/Zodiac evidence, and a 2021 clip into one 'gotcha.' Those are not the same event. I had to remind him in 2024 and then explain why we were there before interviewing. He was glad to oblige."[103] But elsewhere Baber has stated, on camera and on multiple occasions, that he first learned the name "Merrill" itself only in 2024, through decoding the Z13 cipher (ref [8][11][12]). Needing to "remind" the son in 2024 of who Baber was — and having to explain why he was there before the interview could proceed — implies Baber already knew Marvin Merrill/Margolis was the son's father from the earlier Klein-connection contact, years before the Z13 decryption he credits with producing that name.

  • Merril's son has been described as willing to cooperate and share the sketch directly. Why did gaining access to it reportedly require a separate deception?[13]
  • If Baber was in contact with Merrill's son as early as 2021, why was the sketch not mentioned publicly until 2024?[13]
  • What is the basis for the suggestion that Marvin's son Kenneth, a retired judge, was involved in covering up cases against Merrill?[74]
  • Killer in the Code has stated it would not reveal the birth name of Merrill's son. What accounts for that name later appearing in other published coverage?[75]
  • What evidence supports the claim that a 2021 vehicle impoundment in New York, around the time of a scheduled meeting with People Magazine, was connected to that meeting?[76]

Endorsements, institutional credibility, and media coverage

  • Baber has said 50 cryptography experts endorse his findings. Publicly, only cryptographers Ed Giorgio, and to a lesser extent Patrick Henry, have spoken to any endorsement, and Connelly describes Giorgio's work as validating only the internal consistency of a method that already assumed Margolis as the suspect. What is the basis for the larger figure?[3]
  • Cryptography expert Rich Wisniewski is included in the three-person team of supporters of Baber's code work. Are there any public statements from Rich Wisniewski concerning his support?[77]
  • In an email from 2019 to a Zodiac researcher[9][10], Baber said: "I got the #1 crypto professor endorsing the solution now."[78] Who was the professor? Their endorsement was wrong because in 2019, Baber's solutions involved Lawrence Klein and not Marvin Merrill/Margolis. How does Baber address this in light of the endorsements he's recently secured from three retired cryptographers?
  • Rick Jackson has been described in coverage as having worked on the Zodiac case. His law-enforcement career was with the Los Angeles Police Department. What is the basis for that description?[79]
  • Can any current endorsement of the investigation, or of Baber's agency, by a victim's family member be documented?[80]
  • The Debrief podcast has reported that Elizabeth Short's sister paid Baber to investigate her case. How is this reconciled with Baber's repeated statements that he does not accept payment from victims' families?

    The Debrief podcast issued a correction to their statement about Elizabeth Short's sister hiring Alex: "This episode includes a misstatement that Alex Baber was hired by Elizabeth Short’s sister. Mr Baber would like to clarify that he was not hired by anyone to investigate these cases. He briefly spoke with Elizabeth Short’s sister, and that is the extent of his connection to the family."

  • CCCOA's website states that "Alex has built a reputation for credibility." How is this reconciled with the financial, legal, and testimonial history documented elsewhere on this page? (See Financial and legal history and Source testimony.)[81]
  • Why did Baber say Vanity Fair and People Magazine were prepared to run stories on his findings, when direct statements from sources at those outlets describe the opposite? (Examined in detail under Recent claims.)[17][18]

Claims linking the investigation to other cases

  • What is the basis for linking a two-person team, including Merrill, to the Zodiac case, the "Lipstick Killer" case, the Atlanta Child Murders, the Oakland Child Murders, the Freeway Phantom murders, and other solved and unsolved homicides?[82]
  • Did Baber actually speak to Seymour Sherman, a man cleared for the Lipstick Murders, in an attempt to link him to his Margolis/Klein crime duo theory? Did he give contradictory or false information to support this link?[116]

    Baber first raised Sherman unprompted in an April 6, 2020 email to a Zodiac researcher, claiming to have personally spoken with him and reporting specific ages for Ruth and Vivian Margolis, the mother and aunt figures in his theory — ages that conflict with the 1945 newspaper clipping his own theory is built on.[116] Asked by the researcher to elaborate, Baber replied the same day with a more detailed, first-person account of the alleged conversation, including quoted dialogue he attributed to Sherman.[117] When the researcher subsequently produced census, directory, and vital records for the actual Ruth and Vivian Margolis family at the stated Brooklyn address — records consistent with the newspaper clipping and inconsistent with the ages Baber attributed to Sherman — Baber did not revisit the underlying interview claim.[118] Instead, he proposed that a second, identically-named Margolis family lived one block away, and in a same-morning follow-up quietly revised his earlier claim that Vivian "was 9 yrs old" to a vaguer "under 16 years of age," without acknowledging the change.[119] Roughly three months later, with the contradiction never addressed, Baber restated the Sherman claim as something he had "verified," in a summary email to the same researcher laying out his wider Klein/Margolis/Black Dahlia theory.[120] Sherman himself was, per Baber's own telling, already deceased by the time the claim was first made in writing, leaving the one person who could confirm or deny the account unavailable to be asked.[116]

  • A source says Baber claimed to have solved the JonBenét Ramsey and Lindbergh baby cases. Can Baber confirm or deny this?[83]
  • Baber has been described as saying he knew who killed Lindy Sue Biechler. Why did he make no public statement when a suspect was later arrested in that case?[84]

    Responding to a comment (from a thread that's now deleted), Baber wrote: "On Biechler—the investigators on the case approached us. We followed their instructions so not to compromise their active investigation."[102]

  • Can documentation be produced for a claimed contact from retired FBI profiler John Douglas, or for a claimed friendship with James Fitzgerald?[85]
  • Can documentation be produced for a claimed direct involvement in a "case review" of DNA evidence in the Atlanta Child Murders (ATKID) case?[86]
  • What is the basis for a statement, attributed to Baber, that his grandfather — whom Baber has described as a serial murderer — directed his uncle to commit a separate murder?[87]
  • Why did a relative of a victim in the Atlanta Child Murders say that Baber was attempting to profit from his family's grief?[80]

Personal background and credentials

  • Baber has denied a history of working as a car salesman. How is this reconciled with public motor-vehicle salesman licensing records identified in Pennsylvania (1997) and Tennessee (2018)? (Examined in detail under Pattern.)[20][19][22][23]
  • What is the identity and relationship to Baber of accounts including "Dahlila Short" and "@JackDoeland" — accounts that display detailed insider knowledge of the investigation and, in one case, share a non-standard word choice with Baber's own private messages? (Examined in detail under Pattern.)[32][33][34][35][36]

    In a YouTube comment, Black Dahlia researcher Larry Harnisch wrote: "Since all his little sock puppets got outed he has to do the work himself, trying to dodge criticism."[107] Baber replied: "You used the word "sockpuppets." Identify the accounts you are implying, and cite the credible source that established they belong to me."[108]

    Asked by Oranchak in the same comment section whether he created the "Dahlila Short" account, Baber did not answer yes or no, replying instead: "Are you saying I created "Dahlia Short"? If that is the claim, look closer at your own sources."[109]

    Oranchak pressed further, specifically on "@JackDoeland": "You already know my position on your sockpuppets. Either they are your own accounts or you're closely associated with them. Several of them exhibit your linguistic fingerprints, already explored in depth in my videos. The fact that you won't answer direct questions about Jack Doeland is very telling... Jack would have us believe his deep and comprehensive knowledge of you and details of your investigations came from two interviews he conducted with you. If you're denying operating the Jack Doeland account, then please describe those interviews and your connection to Jack Doeland. When did you talk to him?"[110] Rather than answering, Baber replied with a question of his own: "Are you saying personal acquaintances who show support are sock-puppets?"[111] Pressed again, he again declined to say whether he knew Jack Doeland, instead reframing the question a second time: "It's a simple question. You made a statement that I have sock-puppets "or you're closely associated with them." I am clarifying what you said. Any supporter I am acquainted or closely associated with that post a comment in support is a sock-puppet?"[112]

    Oranchak then quoted "Jack Doeland" claiming, in his own words, to have personally interviewed Baber on two separate occasions: "I've interviewed him. First time around a year or so ago about another video and again this year... I have all the interviews. I've interviewed him myself on two occasions."[113] Baber's final reply in the thread still neither confirmed nor denied knowing "Jack Doeland": "It's exactly what you said. I'm not offering up the names of supporters I personally know to be harassed by you or anyone else. I've witnessed what you do first hand—it's not only unprofessional, but it also lacks integrity."[114] At no point in the exchange does Baber state that he does not know, or has no connection to, "Jack Doeland."

    In a separate comment responding to a user named "@SockeyePuppette," Baber went on to describe, in specific technical detail, how a sockpuppet account gets exposed: "A source of David Oranchak's, one we had already identified, posted under a sockpuppet account "literally" and did not route the first IP post through a VPN. Silly like your first attempt—The IP only changed on the second post, then third and so on, so forth. That does not help David's cause. It would be better to speak with him directly before publishing under another name that can be linked back to one of his "credible" sources." This suggests Baber may have knowledge of how to evade detection when using sockpuppet accounts.[115]

  • Can Baber explain a December 2021 Facebook post pairing a photo of a young man in military dress uniform with a recent photo of Baber, captioned to imply it depicts him? (Examined in detail under Pattern.)[26]
  • Baber has stated he still possesses a Protective Services Officer certification. Can he or anyone else produce this documentation?[88]
  • Baber has given differing reasons for leaving Austin's Beauty College — a new employment opportunity in one statement, family health issues in another — while the owner states he was terminated. How is this reconciled? (Examined in detail under Pattern.)[24]
  • Baber has stated he was formally diagnosed on the autism spectrum in childhood, between ages 12 and 13[89]. Can he produce proof of this diagnosis?
  • If Baber was diagnosed with autism between ages 12 and 13 (1987-1988)[89], would he have been disqualified for military service, since autism in those days was considered a "Pervasive Developmental Disorder"?[90]
  • Baber has, at various times, described himself using terms including: high IQ, autodidact, polymath, perceptionism, "brain wired different", autistic, ADHD, OCD, "reads weird", genius, empath, neurodiverse, chronic insomniac, photographic memory, "intuit gifted", and Asperger's[91]. Can any of these be documented, or corroborated by named individuals?
  • Baber has given differing reports of his IQ. In one interview, he said: “I tested 161 at the age of 14, 165 at the age of 18, 168 in my 20s”. In an OCCK Facebook group he said: “My Intelligence Quotient registered at 137 by 12 years old, my currently documented is 161 as of 5 years ago which places me in the top 1% of the entire population on earth.” Can any of these IQ results be documented?[92]
  • Multiple former employers describe negative experiences with Baber.[93] Can other former employers be named who would give a positive account of his employment? (See Pattern and Source testimony.)
  • Baber has stated he has had two ex-wives, but referred to a third former partner as his "wife" in a 2021 interview. How is this reconciled?[94]
  • Why did Baber criticize the idea of a non-journalist performing a journalist's tasks[95], yet said he gave false pretenses to secure a meeting with Marvin Merrill's son[13], and is himself not a credentialed investigator?

Financial history and money raised

  • Baber has said he sold a house in 2007 after being frightened by a phone call attributed to the Zodiac killer, and separately described himself as a victim of the housing crisis. How is this reconciled with a 2009 repossession record for a property in his name? (Examined in detail under Pattern.)[27]
  • Baber later said he eliminated Klein as a suspect. Does he still believe Klein made the 2007 phone call? If not, then who?[96]
  • Court records across multiple states show that most civil court activity involving Baber consists of unsuccessful attempts to serve him with paperwork. What accounts for this pattern? (Examined in detail under Financial and legal history.)[37][38][39][40]
  • Can it be documented how funds raised through a 2021 GoFundMe campaign, described as being for a documentary about Baber's work, were used?[97]
  • A CCCOA website statement describes an "operational plan" to direct a portion of public-venture proceeds into a victim-family relief fund. Have any funds been paid into that fund, and has the operational plan been published?[81]

10. References ↑ Back to top

Citation

Close