On the condition that Inspector David Toschi was correctly exonerated from having mailed the April 24th 1978 letter, it is logical to conclude that the DNA retrieved from the sealed part of this envelope was from the Zodiac Killer, when you consider the inside information that would have been required to create this communication. The 1978 letter had to be authored by either somebody from law enforcement or the murderer of taxicab driver Paul Stine, because of their intimate knowledge of the visual design of the 1969 Melvin Belli letter. There is a widespread misconception being portrayed regarding the testing of Zodiac envelopes (based around events in 2002) that all forensic DNA specialists cannot reason the pitfalls of using DNA collected from the outer surface of envelopes and stamps, believing these highly intelligent professionals are completely devoid of common sense. Nobody in their right mind would consider testing the outside of the envelopes from early Zodiac letters as a productive means to securing the DNA from the Zodiac Killer, irrespective of whether a particular individual has done so.
The arguments used by some individuals in the Zodiac community have attempted to shed doubt on the bloody fingerprints from the Paul Stine taxicab based upon the idea it was a free-for-all at the crime scene, which they have no justification or reason to believe. The same individuals (with suspects) will never give the 1978 letter fair consideration as a Zodiac letter because they know it can potentially rule their suspect out of the investigation, hence they will discredit the bloody fingerprints on the taxicab and the 1978 letter as being from the Zodiac Killer in absence of valid reasoning. Too many people continue to claim a letter is not from the Zodiac Killer because of "handwriting and tone" rather than tackle the points brought forward for its authenticity and attempt to discredit them. It would be productive for these individuals to compare the "handwriting and tone" of the July 31st 1969 trinity of communications with the Melvin Belli letter and try to reason why the tone of these letters are consistent with one another, while simultaneously explaining why the Zodiac Killer is incapable of switching the tone of a letter by design. Stating a letter's tone isn't Zodiac, is an utterly meaningless statement because the handwriting and tone of a letter is subjective to the person interpreting it. Some Zodiac researchers, who once exuded confidence in the bloody taxicab fingerprints and the existence of usable salivary amylase, immediately backpedaled and used subterfuge once they became attached to a suspect whose fingerprints and DNA were already in the system. Having a suspect in tow will inevitably cloud your judgement when investigating the Zodiac case. Not one single researcher who has a suspect in tow (whose fingerprints are on file), will ever argue that the bloody fingerprints on the taxicab of Paul Stine are Zodiac's. Every single Zodiac researcher who thinks Ross Sullivan is the Zodiac Killer will never accept any Zodiac communication subsequent to his death in 1977. They will reject the 1978, 1986, 1987, 1990 and 2001 communications irrespective of any amount of evidence you can produce, because they have already made up their mind that these communications were not authored by the Zodiac Killer. Even if they had never set eyes on these communications, they have already concluded they are hoaxes in advance. Their conclusions are preconceived through the suspect and not the available evidence.
You will hear or read claims that the Kathleen Johns incident, or the Donna Lass abduction/disappearance couldn't have been Zodiac because he had never abducted somebody previously (how do we know that). You will hear or read that a victim who was raped, bludgeoned or strangled to death couldn't have been Zodiac because he had never done this previously (how do we know that). These claims, again, are without foundation. Therefore, when Zodiac targeted taxicab driver Paul Stine, we could claim it wasn't him because he had apparently never done it before. The claim he killed taxicab driver Ray Davis in 1962 could be dismissed because we cannot find evidence of something similar prior to this murder. In fact, Zodiac couldn't have wore a costume during the Lake Berryessa crime or murdered a couple on a lonely road, because he had never done it before (how do we know that). There has to be a first time for everything in life, but we simply don't know when that was for Zodiac.
Somebody stated that the 2001 communication made racially derogative comments, never done before by Zodiac. If this is justification for ruling out the 2001 communication, then we can rule out every single Zodiac communication where he did something for the first time, such as the Melvin Belli letter which expressed vulnerability and mental fragility in direct contrast to the July 31st 1969 letters that threatened more murder and mayhem if his demands were not met. Some may suggest the Melvin Belli letter was simply mocking investigators and the Jim Dunbar Show escapade, but this again requires the reader to interpret the tone of a letter to meet their own ends or argument. How many people on Twitter have posted thousands of benign comments before posting something racially offensive and had to apologize or be cancelled. They could say "it wasn't me because I've never done that before", which I doubt would convince many as a strong argument. Others will say that certain communications don't "feel right", and therefore are unlikely to have been authored by the Zodiac Killer. Our feelings have absolutely no bearing on whether a communication is genuine or otherwise. We have DNA from the 1978 letter, so whatever our feelings are about this letter based on handwriting and tone, the importance of using this letter to shake the ancestral tree should be our first port of call.