……He claimed to have the "most evidence" ever presented against a suspect in the case. I think I’ve put that argument to rest, as well as his infernal handwriting evidence and "reversed bloody fingerprint" argument.

Boy, is that sure an understatement.

Mike, you stated this on Tom’s site "In contrast, 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."

We know handwriting analysis is subjective – even between experts there is disagreement – and therefore the notion of the 1978 letter being unequivocally dismissed as a forgery does not bear scrutiny on this criteria alone. However, I do realize your argument is around the saliva/tap water angle. The 1978 letter may very well be a forgery, but your above statement would be much more noteworthy if we considered the 1978 letter to be possibly mailed by the Zodiac. Then we have two corroborating samples of DNA that certainly could now be used to eliminate suspects.

We know that a partial DNA fingerprint cannot definitively identify an individual, but can eliminate a suspect of being the donor. In other words, a partial DNA fingerprint against a full DNA fingerprint cannot provide a definitive match. Therefore, a partial DNA fingerprint against a partial DNA fingerprint would certainly not be able to provide a match. Your statement of "he finds that the DNA matches between those two letters", thereby by implication, must mean that the DNA material from these two letters has to be a full DNA profile of the sender. Consequently, if we have a full DNA profile from the 1978 letter and a full DNA profile of a 1974 letter, then by extension, we have a possible DNA profile of Zodiac, if these letters were genuine letters mailed by the killer. At the very least, a full DNA profile of one hoaxer, that could be ran through a genetic database or GEDmatch to create a familial link.

Hi,

I believe that SFPD knows who wrote those two letters. That is why the are co confident in calling them forgeries. Why don’t you ask them for verification of that fact and good luck, lol.

Mike

There are two letters linked to Toschi in the forgery case – the 78 and Exorcist letter. So, any subsequent DNA correlation between these letters through the presence of saliva, in contrast to all the other letters, is significant.

Hi,

Exactly. That is why I think the Exorcist letter is the second forgery. I state this in my book.

Mike

If Keel is correct about the DNA matching between these 2 letters then it can be effectively proven that a full DNA profile was achieved with the Exorcist letter the forgery. If they took DNA from the 78 letter and knew who the author was (from the profile), thereby concluding it a forgery, then it had to be a full DNA profile, otherwise they could have only eliminated people. The only other possibility is matching the palm print, which would be unlikely, as Toschi was obviously knowledgeable enough not to leave prints. I have read your book.

There are two letters linked to Toschi in the forgery case – the 78 and Exorcist letter. So, any subsequent DNA correlation between these letters through the presence of saliva, in contrast to all the other letters, is significant.

The Exorcist letter is clearly Zodiac, how could it be linked to Toschi? DNA? Perhaps Toschi drooled over both?

For the most part I have always believed the Exorcist letter to be authentic Zodiac correspondence, but wouldn’t be bold enough, without question, to definitely make a claim one way or another. Deciding on a letter’s authenticity is largely subjective, akin to handwriting analysis, and therefore using this to definitively state a letter genuine Zodiac or otherwise, is unattainable from this standpoint.

The Exorcist letter is clearly Zodiac, how could it be linked to Toschi? DNA? Perhaps Toschi drooled over both?

You would be close. Unlike Zodiac. he would have licked the stamps on both.

Mike

They have a full DNA profile for the Exorcist letter, according to Keel’s statement. Therefore, it could easily be checked in a DNA database, genealogy website or against known individuals.

They have a full DNA profile for the Exorcist letter, according to Keel’s statement. Therefore, it could easily be checked in a DNA database, genealogy website or against known individuals.

I thought you had said above (as per Keel) that they knew who faked the 78 letter. And that person’s DNA matched to the Exorcist letter DNA.

So, why would they waste resources checking genealogy DBs if they already know who faked both?

And, as the Statute of Limitations is up on any potential criminal charge, LE is not interested in ID’ing one of the many Z copycats with no potential for an arrest.

"I thought you had said above (as per Keel) that they knew who faked the 78 letter. And that person’s DNA matched to the Exorcist letter DNA." Can you show me where I said that?

"I thought you had said above (as per Keel) that they knew who faked the 78 letter. And that person’s DNA matched to the Exorcist letter DNA." Can you show me where I said that?

I must be misunderstanding, but you stated this:

If Keel is correct about the DNA matching between these 2 letters then it can be effectively proven that a full DNA profile was achieved with the Exorcist letter the forgery. If they took DNA from the 78 letter and knew who the author was (from the profile), thereby concluding it a forgery, then it had to be a full DNA profile, otherwise they could have only eliminated people.

Mike said Keel told him "In contrast, 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."

If this were true, then to match, these 2 letters must have offered a full DNA profile. If one didn’t have a full DNA profile, then one letter could only eliminated as being licked by the same person as the other. Therefore if Keel is correct in his statement, both letters were not from Zodiac. Why… because the SPPD DNA report in the 1990s stated the 1978 letter was not authentic Zodiac correspondence based on DNA. If the 1978 letter was ruled out as being Zodiac, then one of the 1974 letters has to be ruled out also, because its DNA matches the 1978 letter (according to Keel).

How can they unequivocally rule out the 1978 letter as Zodiac, without knowing either[1] the DNA sampled from the letter was a woman, or [2] they had matched the DNA to a known person, who they definitely knew was not the Zodiac (for example David Toschi). They cannot declare without reservation that the 1978 letter is a forgery by handwriting analysis, because handwriting analysis is not scientifically accredited – it is subjective – which is why some believe it to be genuine and some don’t – including experts. The fact the 1978 letter was declared not Zodiac correspondence in a DNA report, is tantamount to ruling it out through DNA analysis, because you cannot 100% rule it out with subjective handwriting analysis.

Now, if you or the SFPD were going to test any of the 1974 letters to check for viable Zodiac DNA, do you pick the Exorcist letter (widely recognized as the last authentic Zodiac correspondence) or choose one of the other dubious 1974 letters first. The fact the SFPD DNA report states "cells found" next to the Exorcist letter, but nothing next to the other 1974 communications, strongly suggests that Keel’s statement of "DNA matches between those two letters" is referring to the 1978 letter and the Exorcist letter. http://www.zodiackiller.com/SFPDDNA.html

Well, the 1978 letter has long been suspected of being written by a Manson Family personage – especially as it mentions Eldridge Cleaver, plus a singer and actors. Cleaver was mentioned in an earlier suspected Family letter. And movie stars/singers were purportedly in their sights, post Tate-La Bianca. Plus, of course, the tell-tale "1234567 AGCGTH" on the envelope.

But, the Exorcist letter looks too good in terms of Zodiac fakery to be done by Sandra Good or one of her acolytes. I would consider the 1974 SLA letter to be more Family-esque, but that one has no DNA comments next to it in the FBI letters listing.

I have no reason though to doubt Mike R’s note-taking of what Keel said. So, this is a quandary.