In 2002, a new round of DNA testing was performed on some of the Zodiac letters by Dr. Cydne Holt, yet despite an ABC Primetime documentary opening up with the promising statements of "But today thanks to new crime scene technology there's reason to believe time may have run out on Zodiac. Somewhere, perhaps on the back of this postage stamp or in the seal of this envelope, may be microscopic clues that will now finally lead police to the killer", it appears the early optimism of a Zodiac breakthrough has soured. Dr. Cydne Holt stated "We are hoping to be able to get some genetic information about the individual or individuals that did seal these envelopes or place stamps on them".
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.
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.
The San Francisco Police Department DNA report of communications tested in the late 1990s, indicates that "few cells" were found on any of the Zodiac communications up to and including the June 26th 1970 'Button' letter. The letters subsequently tested after this date were all labelled as "cells found". The Kathleen Johns, Little List, Exorcist and 1978 letters all contained potentially measurable genetic material.
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.
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.
Despite the controversy this documentary has generated, it did clearly state "Dr. Holt has already detected the possible presence of Zodiac's DNA in the seal of the envelope that contained the greeting card, and just in case that fails to provide a full DNA profile, she also prepares to look for DNA beneath the stamps on two of these three letters (July 31st 1969 letters)."
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.
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.
But here we are again in 2019, waiting on results from the latest attempt to secure a viable genetic fingerprint of Zodiac to submit to GEDmatch. "Vallejo police Detective Terry Poyser, who has worked the Zodiac case for four years, said his agency has submitted two envelopes that contained letters from the Zodiac Killer for a type of advanced DNA analysis that previously had not been available in the case. Poyser declined to identify the lab, but said it would attempt to obtain a full DNA profile from saliva on the envelope flap and stamps. He said he expected to have results back from the lab as soon as in the next few weeks, and almost certainly by summer. The department has three letters and two envelopes from the Zodiac, Poyser said. The envelopes each have a double stamp, which Poyser said was a trademark of the Zodiac. They originally were sent to the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Francisco Examiner, he said. The third letter was sent to the Vallejo Times-Herald, but does not have an envelope with it, he said. Allen largely was cleared as a suspect in 2002, when investigators obtained a partial DNA sample from the envelopes that didn't match his. Poyser said that DNA profile only had a few markers on it, less than half of the genetic points needed to definitively clear or identify a suspect". Sacramento Bee.
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?
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?
Were the July 31st 1969 letters submitted in 2018 because current law enforcement do believe in the validity of the findings of the 2002 documentary? After all, Detective Poyser did state "Allen largely was cleared as a suspect in 2002, when investigators obtained a partial DNA sample from the envelopes that didn't match his. Poyser said that DNA profile only had a few markers on it, less than half of the genetic points needed to definitively clear or identify a suspect". Law enforcement must believe that DNA was found on the sealed side of the envelopes and stamps from the July 31st 1969 letters, hence why they are focusing on these communications again, in the hope of finding a full or more complete DNA profile using more advanced technology. If law enforcement really believed the DNA testing from 2002 was only achieved by swabbing the exterior of the July 31st 1969 letters, then their unreserved targeting of these communications would be misplaced. But they seemingly don't believe this to be the case. They apparently don't share the reservations of the Zodiac community.
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
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
RSS Feed
