Killer In The Code – Chapter 8: The Round Table, Part 2

Podcast Host: Michael Connelly
Date: February 5, 2026

Episode Overview

In this in-depth roundtable episode, host Michael Connelly continues the investigation into two of America’s most notorious unsolved murders: the Black Dahlia and the Zodiac cases. The panel—consisting of experienced homicide investigators, code-breakers, and Alex Baber, the independent sleuth who claims to have solved the cases—delves into questions from listeners about their suspect, Marvin Margolis, new evidence, the role of family cooperation, the scrutiny of their work, and the broader implications of their findings. This episode is a critical look at how cold cases are reopened, theories are challenged, and the relentless pursuit of truth endures despite public skepticism.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Could Margolis Be Tied to Other Unsolved Cases?

[00:33–05:46]

• Panelists discuss Margolis’ likely mobility and possible connections to other unsolved murders in U.S. cities where he lived (Chicago, Kansas, Atlanta, Arizona) aside from California.
• Mitzi Roberts: “I feel Oceanside is very, very likely his... and the Riverside case of Sherry Jo Bates is probably a very likely case based on the letter that was received.” (01:49)
• The idea that Margolis started his killing at age 21 with Elizabeth Short (Black Dahlia) in 1947 and continued as Zodiac in the Bay Area.
• Rick Jackson: “If you believe that Marvin Margolis is the suspect here, which I do, and if you believe he's the Zodiac, which I do... these type of perpetrators don’t stop usually.” (03:00)
• Reference to how police linked prolific serial killer Sam Little to murders across several states.
• Jackson: “At some point, age factor does factor in and does cause people to eventually stop.” (05:36)

2. Family Cooperation and Evidence

[05:46–08:49]

• Discussion about property and documents turned over by Margolis’ family, including a sketch analyzed by experts—where ‘Zodiac’ is hidden in the shading—and various personal items.
• Alex Baber: “A lot of stuff is just cooperating evidence. It’s not like DNA on knives or anything like that.” (06:06)
• The value of circumstantial and supporting evidence vs. direct forensic evidence in cold cases.

3. Discrepancies in Margolis’ Identity

[08:49–11:19]

• Analysis of a USC report card with a different middle and last name, and what that says about Margolis’ use of aliases.
• Jackson: “It’s just another indication that he’s using... one more alias. And it’s really a pretty close name, obviously.” (08:13)
• Frequent name changes seen as part of his “signature,” consistent manipulation of identity.

4. Gaps in Timeline and Geographic Movement

[09:48–11:19]

• Uncertainty about Margolis’ movements in the early '50s (e.g., possible stints at USC, arrests in Chicago).
• Panel leaves open the possibility that gaps in the record allowed travel and further crimes.

5. Family Views on the Suspect’s Guilt

[11:19–14:24]

• The investigators have encountered a spectrum of responses from family: some in denial, others open to the possibility, several cooperative.
• Baber: “I’ve spoken to directly three that have stated they find this very likely or possible, that he is who we believe he is.” (11:50)
• Jackson: “The fact that they’re willing to give items to us... at least says to me that they’re open to the possibility...” (12:15)

6. Proximity to Zodiac Killings—How Was Margolis Placed in the Bay Area?

[14:25–20:41]

• Evidence connecting Margolis to Bay Area during Zodiac killings:
  • Rental records, job at Intel, son’s school in San Jose (late '60s–'80s).
  • Debate on the weight of circumstantial vs. forensic evidence.
  • Jackson: “Circumstantial evidence… can be just as identifying as DNA or a fingerprint.” (16:55)
• Baber: “At the exact moment that Marvin Margolis can be placed in San Jose in 1978, the Zodiac reappears and he mails an April letter.” (20:08)

7. Why Not George Hodel as Black Dahlia?

[20:41–29:59]

• Connelly addresses his prior public endorsement of Steve Hodel’s theory that his father, George Hodel, was the Black Dahlia killer.
• Connelly: “I read that book knowing very little about the case, and I found it convincing. And… I did live to regret this.” (20:41)
• Cold Case Unit review later debunked most of Steve Hodel’s claims due to lack of evidence and proven alternate suspects for other murders attributed to Hodel.
• Roberts: “Just the fact that [Steve Hodel] is naming cases that we know weren’t his father’s hurts the credibility of the overall investigation.” (24:38)
• The panel emphasizes the necessity of verifiable evidence over compelling narrative.

8. Independent Verification and Scrutiny

[28:41–29:59]

• Baber shares that all findings have been independently verified by experts and authorities, including the FBI and multiple Northern California jurisdictions.
• No law enforcement agency has discounted Baber’s suspect based on presented evidence so far.
• Baber: “Not one individual has said that this doesn’t fit, it doesn’t align.” (29:59)

9. Facing Criticism from the 'Expert' Community

[29:59–34:50]

• Connelly and investigators discuss the challenges and cultural phenomenon of “amateur experts” strongly invested in competing suspects/theories.
• Connelly: “There are many so called experts out there, most of them self anointed... But the facts are facts and we cannot avoid them.” (29:59)
• Roberts: “In detective work, if you do the right thing for the right reasons, it… leads where it leads. So I didn’t really care what they said because I believe in facts backed by the evidence.” (31:42)
• The importance of remaining open to contrary evidence, in contrast to “naysayers” who refuse to consider alternatives.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “He liked killing. The first one that we know of… Elizabeth Short, was a very personal murder… But once you get into the other killings… random people… that shows that he enjoyed killing. And so he's not going to stop enjoying killing when he's living in Kansas or Chicago or Georgia.”
  — Rick Jackson (04:11)

• “Circumstantial evidence, depending on how substantial it is, can be just as identifying as DNA or a fingerprint. People might look at that and shake their head… but this world has gotten so dependent on… DNA and science, sometimes you revert back to circumstantial evidence.”
  — Rick Jackson (16:55)

• “If you do the right thing for the right reasons… it leads where it leads… I believe in facts backed by the evidence. And I think we have that in this case.”
  — Mitzi Roberts (31:42)

• “Not one individual has said that this doesn’t fit, it doesn’t align.”
  — Alex Baber (29:59)

• “Really, how can you say you're an expert in anything if you do not know everything about it, including the consideration of opposite opinions and facts?”
  — Michael Connelly (31:42)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:33 – Cold case connections in other cities
• 05:46 – Evidence and cooperation from Margolis family
• 08:13 – Report card and identity manipulation
• 11:19 – Family perspectives and willingness to cooperate
• 14:25 – Proximity to Zodiac crimes and circumstantial evidence
• 20:41 – Discussion on George Hodel theory and update on investigation
• 28:41 – Verification by independent experts and law enforcement
• 29:59 – Navigating criticism from the “expert” community and the importance of evidence

Tone & Takeaways

The speakers maintain a matter-of-fact, investigative tone—serious but transparent—committed to following the evidence regardless of public pushback or pre-existing theories. The investigators express confidence in the depth and breadth of the circumstantial and corroborative evidence against Margolis, defending the legitimacy and rigor of their process amid skepticism and controversy from invested “armchair experts.”

For New Listeners

This episode serves as a deep dive into the process of vetting a new suspect in infamous cold cases, the importance of independent corroboration, and the resistance faced when challenging entrenched narratives. The panel’s frank discussion, nuanced understanding of investigative work, and willingness to scrutinize even their own early beliefs sets a high bar for true crime investigations and podcasting.