When police zeroed in on DeAngelo as the GSK, they verified their suspicioons by secretly collecting other DNA from him. They then ran his DNA directly against the DNA of the GSK, and obviously it was a match. If DeAngelo had died, they would not be able to collect any further DNA to verify. Yes, they could have built a very strong circumstantial case, but it wouldn’t be a 100% slam dunk DNA match. The Zodiac case would be the same way.

Right you’re not going to have a slam dunk if the suspect is dead. But you know the suspect is within the family tree.

So you isolate the males who were living in the Bay Area during Z activity, who were the correct age range, and you work it from there. Additionally they will have Parabon render a likeness, and determine eye and hair color, which will refine it further.

LE may or may not find a smoking gun at that point, but they will eventually settle on a suspect and close the case.

What might be the procedure if Zodiac is dead? Is it something that will still go thru the rigours of courts to end the case?

Nothing. If the suspect is dead, they can’t bring charges against anyone. They would simply close the case.

IMO, I’d doubt the police would even publicly announce the identity of the suspect out of respect for the surviving family.

What might be the procedure if Zodiac is dead? Is it something that will still go thru the rigours of courts to end the case?

Nothing. If the suspect is dead, they can’t bring charges against anyone. They would simply close the case.

IMO, I’d doubt the police would even publicly announce the identity of the suspect out of respect for the surviving family.

Are you kidding?

What might be the procedure if Zodiac is dead? Is it something that will still go thru the rigours of courts to end the case?

Nothing. If the suspect is dead, they can’t bring charges against anyone. They would simply close the case.

IMO, I’d doubt the police would even publicly announce the identity of the suspect out of respect for the surviving family.

Are you kidding?

A person can still be charged posthumously, it’s been done. There would be no trial however. There have been people charged and tried posthumously, but none in the US that I know of.

True, but you’re assuming a family member would be willing to turn over such an item knowing it might possibly mean a close family member was the most famous serial murderer in American history. If you’re thinking search warrant, I don’t believe a judge would sign off for one with the suspect being deceased.

You never know what a judge will decide but one might well sign off on such a search warrant, it would be much less intrusive than disinterment, which has been signed off on by judges.

Xcalibur wrote

Right you’re not going to have a slam dunk if the suspect is dead. But you know the suspect is within the family tree.

So you isolate the males who were living in the Bay Area during Z activity, who were the correct age range, and you work it from there. Additionally they will have Parabon render a likeness, and determine eye and hair color, which will refine it further.

LE may or may not find a smoking gun at that point, but they will eventually settle on a suspect and close the case.

March 26, 2019 – Washington Post

This is WILD! – apply to the Zodiac case?

Below is a 45 y/o case where the Murderer was dead (died in 2003) and had no criminal record but was a suspect. They did not obtain DNA from his body or a object he might have owned before or after he died.

The police held a news conference saying the Dead Man was the killer. SLAM DUNK IMO!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime-la … 1c974c9638

"On Monday, Yellowstone County Sheriff Mike Linder announced at a news conference that his office believed the person who had committed the murders was Cecil Stan Caldwell, a local man who had died in 2003 at the age of 59. Caldwell had no criminal record,"

"investigators were able to obtain DNA evidence from the purple trousers Linda had worn the night of her killing."

"Parabon used a “snapshot DNA analysis service to accurately predict the physical appearance and ancestry of our suspect.”

The lab produced a “composite profile” of the suspect that estimated what he would have looked like and conducted more analysis in 2018. Parabon identified two “high-confidence leads” through genealogical research. One of them was dead.

On Jan. 18, Linder said, investigators took samples from the living suspect, and a few days later, the Montana State Crime Lab ruled out that person. Through the process of elimination, investigators were able to pinpoint Caldwell as the killer."

I’m a lawyer. I defend homicide cases. That doesn’t make me an authority, but it has provided me some experience to draw upon.

I do not believe there is any authority to charge a person with a crime after that person is dead.

Even if the suspect is deceased, a warrant would issue. There are several reasons why. First, law enforcement would want to know definitively so they can stop investigating. Second, there may be reasons to believe the suspect had assistance from individuals who ARE still alive. If so, this could result in criminal charges against those individuals, and certainty about Z’s identity is a necessity for that. Also, if they can gain certainty, then that could be important for figuring out whether he committed other unsolved crimes in other places.
As suggested above, law enforcement could resort to an exhumation. However, I’m sure they woukd also procure warrants to search homes, apartments, storage locations, offices, etc. of the suspect for any other evidence (for trophies or weapons or costume or anything that could connect the suspect). They would do everything they could to make it air-tight even in the absence of a prosecution. They would do this because it is what they are trained to do, it would satisfy their own curiosity, and (importantly) it’s who law enforcement people are at their core.

I have absolutely NO doubt that law enforcement would do whatever it took to find certainty, even if the suspect is dead. There are no true legal impediments to that. That leaves only one question: would they announce it publicly? You bet your ass they would!

The public deserves to know, especially given the publicity this case has received. THEY don’t want to have to deal with qll of us kooks calling, writing, and emailing them. It can’t be fun to deal with that volume of communication. Also, somebody wants to be the hero of this case. Even if it’s not authorized, the information will be released. Somebody will write a book. Somebody will want to create a consulting firm to make real money and will want the information released. It will be made public in a verifiable way–no doubt.

Most importantly, there are at least three different law enforcement agencies involved. There is always an air of competition in law enforcement (or among any groups of peolle). This is their Super Bowl. Who wins a Super Bowl and doesn’t hold a parade?

What might be the procedure if Zodiac is dead? Is it something that will still go thru the rigours of courts to end the case?

Nothing. If the suspect is dead, they can’t bring charges against anyone. They would simply close the case.

IMO, I’d doubt the police would even publicly announce the identity of the suspect out of respect for the surviving family.

Are you kidding?

Edit:

Please see answer above from an attorney. Perhaps they would announce to the public that a suspect was identified and that the case was closed, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they never revealed their name.

I am with the attorney "One who knows" 100 percent, because he would know! It would surprise me if they didn’t give the name. Do you think they are worried about hurting the killers reputation?

Taking a long shot and calling it a night.

A common ancestor might be found here… My best effort with the best intentions. This is why it takes many months of research to pin point the true culprit. Take this with a grain of salt or leave it.

It would surprise me if they didn’t give the name. Do you think they are worried about hurting the killers reputation?

No, but the killer’s living relatives who are completely innocent of the crimes would be devastated and suddenly placed in the public eye. And honestly, other than satisfying our curiousity, what purpose would it serve to know who it was?

Look, I’d LOVE to know who the Zodiac was. I’m not saying that his name (if he should be ID’d) should be kept a secret. I am merely playing devil’s advocate here. Suppose LE identifies your dead father or dead brother or dead husband as the Zodiac killer. Would you want his name and face plastered all over the internet and supermarket tabloids for really no reason other than to feed an obsession?

It would surprise me if they didn’t give the name. Do you think they are worried about hurting the killers reputation?

No, but the killer’s living relatives who are completely innocent of the crimes would be devastated and suddenly placed in the public eye. And honestly, other than satisfying our curiousity, what purpose would it serve to know who it was?

Look, I’d LOVE to know who the Zodiac was. I’m not saying that his name (if he should be ID’d) should be kept a secret. I am merely playing devil’s advocate here. Suppose LE identifies your dead father or dead brother or dead husband as the Zodiac killer. Would you want his name and face plastered all over the internet and supermarket tabloids for really no reason other than to feed an obsession?

It might hurt his family, but it would hurt his victims’ families to not know his identity and at least have some clarity on why these young people pointlessly lost their lives.

Only Zodiac is responsible for his actions and their consequences.

And honestly, other than satisfying our curiousity, what purpose would it serve to know who it was?

Pretty sure the family of the victims and also surviving victims would want to know and have a right to know. If I were one of those people, I’d tell everybody who the son of a bitch was that killed my family member.

I don’t disagree. Don’t misunderstand me…I’m not trying to protect the killer or mitigate anything they’ve done. I’d love to know who it was, of course.

Honestly, I’m not sure what LE would do. Would they tell the victims’ and killer’s families privately? Or not at all? Or announce publicly? I’m not sure. All I’m saying is that if the Zodiac is identified and it turns out he is dead, it wouldn’t surprise me if LE didn’t publicly reveal the info. That’s all I’m saying.

If law enforcement solves this case, for the reasons I listed above, they WILL announce it publicly. If they announce it publicly that it’s been solved, they WILL name names. Here’s why:

If the case is over (assuming death of Zodiac and no accomplices, etc.) then there is no active investigation. If CA public records laws are anything like the states where I practice, the law enforcement files would be subject to release without redaction. The only reason for denying a public records request or for redacting info is to protect an ongoing investigation.

Also, if I were to represent a victim (Mageau or Hartnell) or a family member of the victim, it is not inconceivable that the statutes of limitation would be tolled. That means it’s entirely possible wrongful death actions could be file even 50 years doen the road.

Further, take the activity on this message board for the last few days for example. We are obsessed; all of us. We each think we know something. If it is announced as solved and closed without a suspect’s being named . . . It will REALLY be "game on" to quote Tom. If they solve it, they will want it OVER. Finally. And for real. They’ll name names if they solve it. No doubt.