It is patently obvious by these statements the importance of securing genetic material from the sealed sections of the stamps and envelopes. Any testing performed on the outside of the stamps and envelopes is absolutely meaningless from a standpoint of identifying the person who was present at the time of their sealing. Since this documentary aired, it is now claimed that this is exactly what transpired in the laboratory - with the letters being swabbed from the outside. The only reason to perform such a pointless procedure, would be if you had failed to find any or enough saliva on the sealed section of the envelopes or stamps tested, yet were determined to carry on with the 'show'. In other words, the ABC Primetime documentary ended up becoming a circus sideshow for ratings, rather than applying the correct procedure which was promised in the opening statements of the documentary. This led to previously ruled out suspects getting a new day in the sun. Despite the fact this round of testing has been routinely discredited by many in the Zodiac community, the documentary has inadvertently revealed so much more about the Zodiac case.
Even Criminalist Alan Keel (according to Mike Rodelli) revealed: "In contrast (to earlier communications), Keel analyzes two other letters, one of which is the 1978 forgery, and finds that this letter and one of the 1974 letters are loaded with saliva and cells. He then easily extracts DNA from both of these letters using the more primitive DNA technology of that time and finds that the DNA matches between those two letters, thus proving that one person sent both." The only other letter in 1974 processed for DNA (where cells were found), was the Exorcist letter. Therefore, the two letters described by Alan Keel "as matching between them" had to be the 1978 letter and the Exorcist letter. If the 1978 letter is 'not an authentic Zodiac letter', then the Exorcist letter is 'not an authentic Zodiac letter' either.
So, here we have four communications that provided notable results, but none were featured in the 2002 ABC Primetime documentary. The fact that the 1978 letter or Exorcist letter were apparently never tested in the documentary, despite being "loaded with saliva and cells", should be enough evidence to conclude that this round of testing didn't consider these two letters as reliable Zodiac communications. Whereas the majority of Zodiac sleuths consider the Exorcist letter to be genuine Zodiac material, the findings of Alan Keel and the reluctance to use this letter at all in the documentary, seems to reject this premise. The documentary made specific reference to the July 31st 1969 letters, the October 13th 1969 Paul Stine letter and the November 8th 1969 'Dripping Pen' card, all of which apparently contained "few cells" according to the San Francisco Police Department DNA report only two years earlier, but made no mention of the July 24th 1970 Kathleen Johns letter or the July 26th 1970 Little List letter, both of which were labelled as "cells found". If you were to choose letters for testing, surely you would choose ones that contained more cells on the sealed sections of the envelopes and stamps.
They would ultimately claim a partial DNA fingerprint which they used to rule out Arthur Leigh Allen, Kjell Qvale and Charles Collins as the infamous Zodiac Killer. But many believe they failed to find enough material from the sealed sections of the communications and thus resorted to swabbing the outside of the envelopes and stamps. However, Dr. Cydne Holt did affirm that she needed to find DNA matching between the envelope seal of the greeting card and the July 31st 1969 letters, stating "Depending on whether those DNA's match each other, might allow me to include or exclude Arthur Leigh Allen as potentially contributing the DNA on the Zodiac letters". The act of later ruling out all three suspects, including Arthur Leigh Allen, implied she had found a DNA match between these two separate correspondences. Even if she had swabbed the outside of the letters to keep the 'show' on the road, it would still imply (using her words) that a match between separate communications must be found before ruling Arthur Leigh Allen in or out as "contributing the DNA on the Zodiac letters". But what are the realistic chances of finding a DNA match between the Dripping Pen card envelope and one of the July 31st 1969 letters by swabbing the outside of each correspondence? The concluding elimination of the suspects near the finale of the show seemed to suggest, one way or another, she did. The subsequent reluctance of the participants in the documentary to confirm the validity of the testing and the new round of testing in 2018, appears to negate the ABC Primetime documentary as a reliable venture.
Again, the emphasis squarely focuses on the July 31st 1969 envelopes and stamps, despite the much earlier Zodiac correspondences showing a tendency toward "few cells" being discovered. The July 31st 1969 letters were not available during the San Francisco Police Department DNA testing in the late 1990s, but why are the Kathleen Johns and Little List letters seemingly passing under the radar again in this latest round of testing, when the 2000 SFPD report clearly states that "cells were found" on these communications? The apparent omission of the Exorcist letter for submission this time round, despite being "loaded with saliva and cells" according to Criminalist Alan Keel, may further bolster the notion that law enforcement have no confidence in this being a Zodiac letter. Does the apparent reluctance to consider the Kathleen Johns and Little List letters for testing in 2018, suggest an equal lack of confidence?
It could be regarded as contradictory that the majority of the Zodiac community believe the Exorcist letter to be a genuine Zodiac correspondence - one that is widely touted as the final confirmed communication by the Bay Area murderer by ardent sleuths and law enforcement alike, which according to Alan Keel is "loaded with saliva and cells" - yet was seemingly roundly ignored in 2002, and once again in 2018, when this letter by all accounts should be the first port of call regarding biological material. It strongly suggests that the exhibited confidence in the January 29th 1974 letter is totally misplaced - and the Zodiac Killer may never have returned in 1974 at all.
DNA AND THE DAVID TOSCHI CONTROVERSY