I’m pretty sure LE can run plate numbers without authorization.

It doesn’t appear that anyone is allowed to run unauthorized DNA through GED Match though.

I hope I’m wrong!

Would running a fingerprint, comparing it to others in some database, be different? Just asking.

I too hope you are wrong. Criminals that are 100% guilty should not have a loophole that might allow them to escape justice.

unauthorized DNA

That will be the key, the definition in this case of "unauthorized".

In my opinion, the DNA used by LE was voluntarily abandoned at a crime scene and therefore is the property of LE. They are therefore authorized to use it to their discretion.

Deangelo abandoned his rights to it, just as he did with whatever it was he discarded that the police used to get their new sample to compare to the sample in evidence. The law is clear and settled on that aspect. It’s no different than how they can go through your trash once it leaves your property. You have abandoned any claim to it.

That’s an interesting analysis – what about stamps on an envelope mailed to a newspaper though?

That’s an interesting analysis – what about stamps on an envelope mailed to a newspaper though?

I’d say you’ve ceded any rights to them as well. Anything left in the public is fair game. You’re not expecting it to remain soley your private possession. Once you mail it they became the property of the person who receives it, who is then free to do with it what they wish. You might have some rights and expectation for the contents to remain private, but not the envelope or the stamp. Even though you’ve paid for the stamp, a court might consider it still the property of the federal government anyway.

There’s logic to that – but what if the stamp was licked by someone else, at the request of an ALA?

That person now gets interrogated, and so forth, based on DNA they never knowingly authorized LE to run through a private database.

Not trying to nitpick, I just don’t see the procedure holding up for long.

My thought is they better try to solve all the cold cases they can that way, sooner rather than later.

There’s logic to that – but what if the stamp was licked by someone else, at the request of an ALA?

I’d say it doesn’t matter who licked it, they knew that was going into the US mail.

This all comes back to public domain. They can’t make you give a DNA sample, at least not without a court order and solid reason and even then I’m not sure, but anything you leave in the public arena is fair game. They can even swab the door handle of your car for touch DNA if it is not on your property but in a public place. Laws can vary from state to state but Federal law supersedes them. Expectation of privacy is not extended to every thing in life, you willingly give that up most of the time.

I’m sure the defence will challenge the police methods, but I don’t think they have a leg to stand on.

Understood, but a postal worker who handled the Zodiac letter wouldn’t fall in that category in my opinion.

Same with an innocent bystander at a crime scene from whom LE procured a DNA profile (such as a previous passenger in Stine’s cab.)

In those cases I think LE and their attorneys would have to go a long way to convince a judge they were ‘authorized representatives’ of those people.

Understood, but a postal worker who handled the Zodiac letter wouldn’t fall in that category in my opinion.

Same with an innocent bystander at a crime scene from whom LE procured a DNA profile (such as a previous passenger in Stine’s cab.)

In those cases I think LE and their attorneys would have to go a long way to convince a judge they were ‘authorized representatives’ of those people.

Well, I think in Zodiac’s case it’s going to take more than just a DNA match in the situations you cite especially. But if DNA taken from Stine’s cab matches DNA pulled from the letters/envelopes, that’s going to be pretty strong. If DNA comes back to a postal worker, proof that person worked as a postal employee at the time the letters were mailed would most likely clear them unless other evidence implicates them.

Police get false leads all the time but they must investigate those leads. Unless they charge someone with a crime it’s a "no harm, no foul type of deal". In the Deangelo case they at first followed a false lead to some guy in a nursing home in Oregon. A direct DNA comparison cleared him. I know his daughter complained about them taking a DNA sample from him, so we might hear more about that later on. But if the guy is in his right mind and voluntarily submitted his DNA, there’s no problem.

I’m not sure exactly where they got the original DNA sample from Deangelo, I’ve read semen stored by a crime lab and also touch DNA from ropes used, I’m not sure. But either way, that DNA was ceded by the suspect and LE has authority over it.

My point is that right now we’re in the Wild West stage where anything goes.

Anyone can check a box claiming they are ‘authorized’ to run a comparison on someone’s DNA profile.

Yes, maybe the DeAngelo investigators consulted an attorney and were told they were fine, but that doesn’t mean jack.

Challenges and restrictions are likely – currently there’s a window of opportunity, so don’t waste time.

Even Vallejo apparently going with the ‘budget results’, rather than spending more money and getting them expedited, could backfire.

My point is that right now we’re in the Wild West stage where anything goes.

Anyone can check a box claiming they are ‘authorized’ to run a comparison on someone’s DNA profile.

Yes, maybe the DeAngelo investigators consulted an attorney and were told they were fine, but that doesn’t mean jack.

Challenges and restrictions are likely – currently there’s a window of opportunity, so don’t waste time.

I agree, notice I haven’t tried to state anything as fact and repeatedly say it will depend on court rulings, but based on past precedent and the fact this is an open source site that allows the use of aliases I think makes the police ok in this case. And yes, anyone can check that box and if they outright lie they can face repercussions, but in this case I think a court would say the police have authority to use that DNA.

You make a good case that LE likely has the authority, if LE is running DNA collected at the scene that they know belongs to their suspect.

Not convinced though that LE is in the clear doing that if they don’t know whose DNA it is.

So let’s say this gets challenged, and it goes all the way to the Supreme Court. Do you think they are going to find in DeAngelo or Zodiac’s favour?