ITA and imo, Ted’s brother makes himself look guilty by not supplying any DNA! He turned Ted in for the bombing so why refuse dna testing unless he is somehow involved?
Ted definitely looks like the most likely culprit at this point imo. Today being Halloween would be the perfect time for someone to approach him with the subject of the Zodiac and ask him his opinion about that and Halloween and other related topics.
The only thing that bothers me about Ted being a suspect is his atheism as that would seem to preclude thoughts of an afterlife and guilt feelings ("the confession letter") and the other writings with religious overtones.
David declined to provide DNA to me. He said he did not think Ted was the Zodiac, Tylenol Murderer or EAR/ONS, but he also said he did not want to do anything that could risk Ted being exposed to the death penalty. Of course Ted would only be exposed to the death penalty if he were guilty of one of those crimes!
Ted was not religious, and his parents were agnostic/atheist, but he was a Polish American with extended family that were Catholic. Ted studies everything, including religion. In fact he once wrote very perceptively about how the early Christian movement changed after the departure of Jesus, and became more bureaucratic and less passionate with the growth of the church as an institution. Also I do not think the confession letter was real in its sentiments, it is misdirection. And Ted had a copy of the Prose Edda in his cabin, the main book of Norse myths, and many other books about anthropology, myth and history. So he certainly knew about various religious myths and stories.
Ted has been asked about being Zodiac and he never denied it, or responded, but declined to provide any alibi evidence. See what happened when Doug Oswell and another writer asked him about being Zodiac. Ted is happy being a hero to many in the primitivist anarchist and radical environmental movements, for his actions against corporate targets. He is not going to admit to killing teenagers in lovers lanes. In his diary detailing the Unabomber crimes, he says that accounts and evidence of other unspecified crimes has been burned or buried because their exposure would be "dangerous", "embarrassing" or "just very bad public relations at this time".
See;
Many years back Doug Oswell wrote the following letter to Ted Kaczynski asking for proof of an alibi for Zodiac murder and mailing dates. He never got an answer. Also, an attorney for Ted told a writer that they could not provide an alibi for any of these dates – not that they would not, but that they could not.
The first Unabomber crime was in 1978, yet in the early seventies Ted recorded that he had already engaged in "violent rebellion" against society. In September 1966 Ted recorded the "breakthrough" moment in his life, when he decided to "REALLY kill everyone I hated".(Emphasis in original). The people he hated included "bigshots", scientists, big businessmen, police – but also "rowdy college students" promiscuous women who are "pigs, animals" and "noisy" love making couples.
Had Ted supplied an alibi for any of the key Z dates, that would end speculation about him being Z.
This is the letter from Doug oswell:
Mr. Kaczynski:
My name is Douglas Oswell. For the past five years I have been researching the similarities between the Unabomber and a world-renowned criminal styled “Zodiac,” who became a pop-culture icon in the late 1960s through a series of sensational murders and correspondences with the press.
At this juncture I have uncovered no evidence that would forge a definite link between the activities of the Unabomber and those of Zodiac. Authorities at both the state and federal level have written off the likelihood of any such connection. Nevertheless it is undeniable (even by the detractors of a connection) that many similarities exist.
I have been advised that it would be unfair to suggest such a connection without offering you the opportunity to defend the reputation of the Unabomber and the philosophy for which he stood. To that end I would like to present you with a list of dates and ask that you provide accounts of your whereabouts for as many of those dates as possible. A valid alibi for even a single date, backed by documentary evidence, would be sufficient to prove conclusively that there is no linkage whatsoever between the sordid crimes of Zodiac and the more principled (albeit terrible) activities of the Unabomber.
Here is the list of dates in question:
Month
Day
Year
December
20
1968
July
4—5
1969
July
31
1969
August
1—8
1969
September
27
1969
October
11—13
1969
November
8—9
1969
December
20
1969
April
20
1970
April
28
1970
June
26
1970
July
24
1970
July
26
1970
October
5
1970
October
27
1970
March
13
1971
March
22
1971
Alibis for the following dates, while helpful, would not be conclusive in discounting a connection:
Month
Day
Year
June
3—6
1963
February
3—6
1964
October
30
1966
November
1
1966
April
30
1967
October
22
1969
March
22
1970
Please bear in mind that any alibi should be backed either by documentary evidence or the word of a reliable individual. In the latter case I would appreciate receiving from you a letter or letters of introduction that will establish my credibility to any such person.
It is only fair to state that I do not consider your brother, David Kaczynski, to be a reliable individual for the purpose of establishing an alibi. In 1990, based on conversations with your brother, a friend of his wrote a heretofore unpublished novel about “a Berkeley professor’s war with technology.” Within that novel the fictional "Berkeley professor" committed murder to promote his worldview, thus anticipating the actual truth long before the Unabomber entered the public imagination.
Whatever the case, I will publish your response in such a way that it may be freely accessed by any interested person.
There is an advantage to you in this. The entire world is aware that you have risked your life to disprove the notion that the Unabomber’s actions were not philosophically motivated, but simply the result of a deviant or warped psychology. I must frankly tell you that the postulated linkage between Zodiac and the Unabomber has grown and persisted in the past five years. Indeed, it shows signs of strengthening in the years to come. I fear that if this theory is not thoroughly refuted, posterity will know the Unabomber not for his principled stand against technology, but for his similarity to a sick and sordid criminal who murdered minor children to assuage his sexual frustrations and shore up a foundering ego. The Zodiac Killer is widely known as “America’s Jack the Ripper.” The Unabomber is fast becoming the “favorite suspect" in a mystery that, because it remains unsolved, will endure for many years to come. You alone can divest him of that distinction.
I thank you for your attention to this matter and encourage you to respond. Enclosed is a small amount of money ($5.00) to defray the cost of postage and stationery.
Sincerely,
Douglas E. Oswell
————————————-
Doug told me he never got a reply to this letter.
If TK was NOT the Zodiac, it would be so easy for him to blow this whole idea out of the water, by producing a timecard, a paycheck, class attendance sheet, a letter, postmarked envelope, a photograph, a witness.
Doug told me another writer got a response from Ted’s attorney that NO ALIBI for the above dates could be produced. Not that they would not produce an alibi but that they "could not" produce any alibi for any of the dates.
LINDA:
Sounds like the letter must have gotten through if someone got a response from Ted’s attorney regarding no alibi being available. I’ve always found it interesting that in the Unabomber case itself, the period of time from Ted’s college years until 1978 seem to be brushed over. If there had been a trial, maybe some more about these years would have come out, but since he plead guilty, these years are presented almost as a blur…
AK WILKS:
onewhoknows asked: "Dear AK have you ever sent a letter to TK and asked him if he is the Zodiac? Just wondering"
AK: I have not yet, but in the first post you can see what happened when Doug Oswell did.
Ted did not respond.
This still cracks me up!
Apparently Ted Kaczynski is the only person left in the world besides Robert Graysmith who thinks Allen was the Zodiac.
Ted relies on the fact that according to him "law enforcement authorities concluded I had no connection with the Zodiac case." 
Yep thats Ted, always a big believer in how right the law enforcement authorities are! This from the man who said the "FBI isn’t going to catch [me] anytime soon. The FBI is a joke." 
MODERATOR
Thanks A.K. for the information above. It seems you and Teddy may share similar views of the FBI so I think he might respond to a letter from you. You seem to have a nice way with words and could ask the needed questions in a more neutral way, perhaps. I would like to know if any reason was given by the attorney re. WHY no alibi could be given for those dates.
As I posted somewhere earlier, if Ted or anyone was just home alone and not talking on the phone, how could they ever give an alibi if asked for one? Or what if someone was alone just out walking or studying at a library or eating perhaps at a coffee shop? It generally would be pretty hard to prove it if asked, especially years after the fact if they even could remember where they were and what they were doing at a specified time.
Could someone at a prison take dna they obtained from the laundry, for example, and have it tested? IIRC this was done in a high profile case and was discussed on Court TV by one of their "experts" or show hosts such as Nancy Grace. If so, it seems that many questions could be answered and lots of speculation could be ended once and for all even though the results may not be admissable in court proceedings if they were obtained through surreptitious means.
Fair questions. Ted was a student in 63 & 66. Ted was a prof at Berkeley during the time of the first Z murder and worked odd jobs in the years after that. As for other Z murder and mailing dates, Ted could produce paycheck stubs, time sheets, class attendance sheets, postmarked letters, pictures or names of witnesses. In later years Ted was more isolated and it would be harder for him to produce evidence. But Ted kept receipts for stuff he bought.
Ted’s attorney told a writer that they could not produce any alibi evidence. Ted did not even respond to Doug and give an account of where he was on the questioned dates.
By law they are supposed to take Ted’s DNA. They asked Ted to give DNA in the Tylenol case and he refused. I can’t explain why they will not get it done.
I may write Ted a letter.
MODERATOR
Oh good! I hope you do write Ted a letter and I’ll bet he will send you a nice reply. He will probably respond a lot faster than the FBI did too LOL!
I’ve never understood this DNA business. Can he simply deny to provide them with a sample – and that is that? Their hands are tied? Even if he is A) a viable suspect or at least a person of interest to them and B) an inmate. The latter category have their rights, of course, and so it should be – but still, it just seems damn odd to me that he can simply plain refuse to cooperate and that’s the end of it.
ITA…it is ridiculous that his DNA has not been taken in all this time and I’m wondering if maybe it has and nobody knows about it. Otherwise, it would be very easy to get it just from his dishes and clothing and test it.
Wilks, if you write to Ted, maybe you could enclose a copy of Zodiac’s codes and ask him to decipher them if possible and/or get his thoughts about them if he hasn’t been asked already.
I wonder if Ted knows (he probably does) that DNA can test for ancestry. Wouldn’t it be something if he was related to someone famous? (Especially considering his mathematical genius, it would be very interesting to research his family tree as far back as possible.)
I’m thinking his dna may prove him to not be Zodiac but could involve him in other crimes that nobody suspects him of or knows about since the brother refused to provide it. Or maybe the brother really thinks Ted is innocent of any other crimes but doesn’t want to risk anything worse being thrown his way and feels no obligation to provide it to someone who is just writing a book.
I’m trying to look at the refusal from their point of view and think I’d probably refuse to give it to anyone without legal authorization as well.
Recently I’ve read somewhere (could have been somewhere here) that dna is not the end-all it was thought to be re. proving guilt as there were instances of criminals framing innocent persons by planting their dna or some such thing.
‘
David raised that point with me. he said "Im pretty sure the police don’t have citizens do their work for them. No police have asked me for DNA." And it is a fair point. I passed that along to a detective and said "While David has turned me down, he seems to leave the door slightly open to giving DNA if he gets an official request from law enforcement." If that detective or another one ever did ask David, and what David said, I don’t know.
David told me he did not think Ted was the Zodiac or Tylenol Killer but he also said he did not want to do anything that could expose Ted to the death penalty. Which I can understand.
I talked to the former head of the FBI CODIS program and he told me that while Ted did kill 3 people, he was never charged with murder under state laws. He pled guilty to federal charges of using an explosive device to cause injury or death. At the time he pled, that charge was not one of the charges that carried DNA collection with it. Now it does. So Ted slipped through the system. But I have no explanation as to why they will not simply get it done. They asked him for a DNA sample in Tylenol and he refused. They said they would get a court order, but I don’t know if they did.
MODERATOR
Why? Simply because there is absolutely no BUREAUCRATIC pressure being applied to cause LE to act. The Feds have their man. The case is wrapped up and the suspect is in jail. Without a legitimate and collective out cry from the public sector or the unlikely call to reopen by judical higher ups, the TJK case will go no further.
Hopefully some new evidence will emerge to rekindle interest and action.
Why? Simply because there is absolutely no BUREAUCRATIC pressure being applied to cause LE to act. The Feds have their man. The case is wrapped up and the suspect is in jail. Without a legitimate and collective out cry from the public sector or the unlikely call to reopen by judical higher ups, the TJK case will go no further.
Hopefully some new evidence will emerge to rekindle interest and action.
Unfortunately I think you are probably right. I even got my local congressman involved to try to apply some pressure.
My hope is if there is a breakthrough in even ONE of these cases, it could perhaps cause a chain reaction of interest and action.
My best hope right now is in regard to the Midwest murders, as some of the detectives seemed open to new ideas, a homicide detective captain actually calling me on the phone. And they have possible suspect DNA in that case (Bricca) so I have the longshot hope that a connection in that case to either Z and/or TK could break open the logjam of bureaucratic red tape, ineptitude and inertia.
MODERATOR
I read something the other day regarding DNA, CODIS and such matters – and the gist of it was, as I understood it, that the authorities have the right to secure DNA samples from ANYONE who has been convicted of a felony. Without their consent, that is – and by force if necessary. That’s how I read it, anyway.
Does anyone know exactly what laws are applicable here? Is the above actually true?
I read something the other day regarding DNA, CODIS and such matters – and the gist of it was, as I understood it, that the authorities have the right to secure DNA samples from ANYONE who has been convicted of a felony. Without their consent, that is – and by force if necessary. That’s how I read it, anyway.
Does anyone know exactly what laws are applicable here? Is the above actually true?
Basically true.
I talked to the former head of FBI CODIS and he explained to me that while Ted killed three men he was not convicted of murder. Ted pled guilty to using an explosive device to cause injury or death. At that time that charge did not carry with it mandatory DNA collection. Now I think all felony convictions trigger such collection.
The FBI asked Ted to give a DNA sample in the Tylenol case and he refused. They said they would get a court order. I do not know what ultimately happened. I can’t explain why they dragged their feet so much. The law is on their side and reasonable force can be used to get the collection. So either it is just a very bad case of the usual red tape and bureacratic inertia OR they do not really want Ted’s DNA in the system maybe because it might affect some other cases like convicted Judge Vance bomber Roy Moody.
MODERATOR
Thanks, AKW.
Well, that clears up at least some things. One might speculate as to why TK would deny such a request. Apart from the obvious explanation I’d say it’s plausible that he’s just being contrary (he’s not too fond of the law, I would imagine, and he’s got little to lose by being a bastard about it) or for that matter offended (regarding himself as above such unpleasantness).
On the other hand one might speculate as to why they don’t simply get their sample (using force, which they apparently can) if they consider him a viable suspect.
Could be red tape, simple as that – combined with a lack of urgency, the man’s behind bars, after all, it’s not like he’s going anywhere.
Anyway, thanks again for the clarification.
Thanks, AKW.
Well, that clears up at least some things. One might speculate as to why TK would deny such a request. Apart from the obvious explanation I’d say it’s plausible that he’s just being contrary (he’s not too fond of the law, I would imagine, and he’s got little to lose by being a bastard about it) or for that matter offended (regarding himself as above such unpleasantness).
On the other hand one might speculate as to why they don’t simply get their sample (using force, which they apparently can) if they consider him a viable suspect.
Could be red tape, simple as that – combined with a lack of urgency, the man’s behind bars, after all, it’s not like he’s going anywhere.
Anyway, thanks again for the clarification.
Can’t you obtain DNA evidence without consent by just grabbing a hair from his brush in jail, or taking his cup after he is done with it and using the cells from his lips touching it or something of that nature? Or is it that when you are in prison things like that are not allowed? I mean if there was enough evidence to link him I would also think they could have gotten a court order at this point to get his DNA….there are ways around a voluntary action I know.
Seems more like the case against him is not strong enough to warrant them doing such a thing though.
Well regardless of any suspicion of him for Tylenol or Zodiac, and the strength or weakness of those cases, by law they are supposed to obtain his DNA. So I can’t explain the inaction. They thought enough of the evidence that I presented to them on Tylenol to at least ask Ted for a DNA sample. They said they would get a court order. Since getting a DNA sample is minimally invasive, all it requires is a cotton swab swipe of the mouth, you do not need to show much to get a court order for DNA. Certainly there is enough in Tylenol, just based on his known record of hatred for corporations, violent actions and his parents house in Lombard, IL in relation to the tampering sites, to get a court order. And under existing laws it should be done anyway. So I can’t explain the hold up other than the usual BS and red tape or some other reason I don’t know.
MODERATOR
