The odds that the Zodiac Killer asked someone else to lick his envelopes for him are remote.
I wonder if SFPD managed to obtain a valid DNA profile of the Zodiac Killer last year. Can anyone find out?

Hi-

For the umpteenth time, testing has shown that apparently NOBODY licked the envelopes or stamps. Why is that so difficult to grasp? Why do we still talk about someone else licking stamps and envelopes? I don’t get it. If there so little saliva that a lab guy from SFPD said the letters could well have been sealed with tap water, why are we talking about friends or associates licking the envelopes?

Smithy, the Badlands cars appears to be preprinted with a printed stamp, not a licked stamp. Is that correct? If so, what did Z lick?

Mike

"In 2002, SFPD developed a partial DNA profile from the saliva on stamps and envelopes of Zodiac’s letters. SFPD compared this partial DNA to the DNA of Arthur Leigh Allen. A DNA comparison was also made with the DNA of Don Cheney, who was Allen’s former close friend and the first person to suggest Allen may be the Zodiac Killer. Since neither test result indicated a match, Allen and Cheney were excluded as the contributors of the DNA, though it cannot be stated definitively that it is DNA from the Zodiac on the envelopes"

Did they reverse their thinking on the DNA after this test? I am curious, why did they test Cheney’s DNA, did they suspect him? I recall he made a weird statement that if his DNA showed up on stamps or envelopes, it was because ALA asked Cheney himself to lick some. Am I remembering this correctly?

LE also asked Lloyd Cunningham to examine Cheney’s handwriting to the Zodiac letters, and it was a non-match. They thought ALA committed the murders and
Cheney wrote the letters for him.
Did SFPD develop a new DNA profile for the Zodiac Killer last year? That is what is being reported in this thread…

I hear the wind whistling through this thread…does anyone know…did SFPD develop a new Zodiac DNA Profile last year?
And if they did, based on what criteria would we know this DNA is the Zodiac Killer’s?

Most everything was done in 2002ish. I go by this:

http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/blog/z … f-answers/

I hear the wind whistling through this thread…does anyone know…did SFPD develop a new Zodiac DNA Profile last year?
And if they did, based on what criteria would we know this DNA is the Zodiac Killer’s?

what makes you think SFPD developed a new DNA profile last year? And since you have contacts in the various LE groups that worked on the case, etc., why not ask them and not us? Surely your LE contacts would know more than we do.

Hi-

I’d invite Insp. Hofsass to explain why she thinks they have Z’s DNA. Based on what I know from their effort last year, I find it hard to believe that such is the case. She asked Repetto, who was retiring, to help her expedite the "top secret" DNA testing they were doing last year. This would have been in May or June. Repetto had been around so long that he knew the Chief pretty well. What Repetto told me is that he went to the Chief and said that they needed to expedite the DNA testing because "Mr. X is not going to live forever." So you can judge how seriously SFPD took me and how confident they are in their precious "Zodiac DNA" insofar as ruling people out is concerned. I can only lead you to the water; I can’t make you drink.

The reason they DNA can’t rule anyone in or out is not due to the # of markers. It is because they do not know who the DNA belongs to. That is why they said it "may not be reliable."

Mike

I have no LE contacts with SFPD. Also Sandy Betts reported that at the July SF Zodiac gathering/event SFPD claimed they were working on a DNA profile.
Sarcasm will not solve these murders. It appears some new DNA work was done last year. I know there are law enforcement folks and journalists who follow
the Z sites. Can anyone find out?

Hi-

Here is what they are saying about the new JTR DNA sample:

"Peter Gill, a pioneer in DNA profiling said “The shawl is of dubious origin and has been handled by several people who could have shared that mitochondrial DNA profile. Normally you go for peer-review before going to the press. This hasn’t been reviewed by the scientific community.”

Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys, who invented DNA fingerprinting, said: “An interesting but remarkable claim that needs to be subjected to peer review, with detailed analysis of the provenance of the shawl and the nature of the claimed DNA match with the perpetrator’s descendants and its power of discrimination; no actual evidence has yet been provided,”

Same could be said about the 2002 SFPD sample!

Mike