7. Allegedly, Toschi also told Hines that Zodiac could be “50 years old or even older”. He said this despite all public information regarding the Zodiac’s description stating that the oldest he could be is 45 years old. Where does Toschi get the information that he could be older? Worse, if this information is true, then why is he keeping a key piece of identifying evidence to himself?

All the 60+ Zodiac finger/palm/impression prints (LC A-10042) are classified belonging to ages: 40-44, 45-49, 50-54, 55-75 etc. Never a age below 40. I haven’t calculated the average but I suspect it will be 50+. That may have been his source.

Are you stating they can "age" a finger print, as in the suspect maybe "40" years old? Or is the the actual age of the print, as in this print is from 1990 so it is classified as 30?

Yes, they can estimate the age of a suspect by prints. The ridges that form the pattern are more prominent in young individuals. Alternatively Zodiac engaged in heavy manual labor, which makes the ridges less prominent on the short term.

Yes, they can estimate the age of a suspect by prints. The ridges that form the pattern are more prominent in young individuals. Alternatively Zodiac engaged in heavy manual labor, which makes the ridges less prominent on the short term.

Super interesting. Where did you learn about the manual labor theory? I would like to hear more.

OK. I snipped an earlier anecdote about Stine’s glasses because I couldn’t place the source. Turns out that I actually did read that somewhere:

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/zodiack … 102#p70102

Now…"50 year-old Zodiac" was definitely mentioned in the Lafferty book. It’s possible Toschi said it to Hines as well, however, I’m not a big Larry Kane guy and my brain might have blended them together. The fingerprints sound like a good explanation. (Though I’m amazed Toschi would accuse Lafferty of "making up" a 50 year-old suspect just because of that info.)

That’s a very interesting anecdote. The hits keep on coming. You were on to Toschi over ten years ago before I was even posting online about Zodiac.

I think it’s time for a reckoning. Those amateur investigators who received information from Toschi should now be questioning the veracity of his statements. We can’t allow one guy sidetrack the entire case.

Well, 8 or 9, maybe…

Geez, Gaikowski was still a "new suspect" (sic) when I got into this…and I remember when KQ was on Twitter and I debated following him…

I can think of a suspect who would have had 50 year-old fingerprints in 1969. In fact, exactly 50 years old lol.

Mike

Here is an article from the Napa Valley Register from 1978 that states unequivocally that the other letter that was believed to have been forged by Dave Toschi was the 1974 Exorcist letter.

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/63498213/

Here’s another article stating that state document examiners had analyzed the Exorcist letter again and confirmed it as genuine:

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/63498734/

Yep…both sent after a long silence, both "authenticated," so LE had another go at it.

The writing on the Exorcist letter does look really good.

I recently ran across a statement int he FBI files in which they state that “…Toschi had written three letters to gain publicity for the Zodiac case.”

So both the FBI and the SFPD believed he had forged up to THREE Zodiac letters. The question is “which ones”?

He has links to the 1978 letter, the Exorcist letter, the LA Times letter, and the Pines Card. Take your pick.

I recently ran across a statement int he FBI files in which they state that “…Toschi had written three letters to gain publicity for the Zodiac case.”

So both the FBI and the SFPD believed he had forged up to THREE Zodiac letters. The question is “which ones”?

He has links to the 1978 letter, the Exorcist letter, the LA Times letter, and the Pines Card. Take your pick.

Maybe somebody who knew Toschi can help me understand all this. First, it seems the consensus opinion that Dave really did want the case solved. Second, there are ample accounts that he authored some of these letters. So my question is, why didn’t he, at some point later in his life, help clear up the confusion he created by coming clean and admitting to his Z forgeries? Why would he die, leaving the evidence so muddled, especially knowing that with DNA analysis, testing letters from actual Z was imperative?

This has always puzzled me. A guy who we think wanted the case solved so very much, yet seemingly doing his best to muddy the waters for forensic analysis.

Was that the Gareth Penn thing that I (barely) remember talking about with Mike R? It was a recap of the case that sounded like a cross between the Lafferty book and Reddit…except it was written by the FBI, lol. It mentioned multiple Toschi hoax letters. Again, it does seem like there was a widespread belief that Toschi did this.

Not only did Toschi forge Zodiac letters, but it also appears that he enjoyed passing misinformation about the case to amateur sleuths. Much of that misinformation exists in the Zodiac world today.

Regarding why? I think he was embarrassed. IMO, he was a narcissist and would never want to admit what he had done. Worse, I think the SFPD was complicit in protecting Toschi in not being forthcoming about his fake info and forgeries.

Posted by: @jarlve

Yes, they can estimate the age of a suspect by prints. The ridges that form the pattern are more prominent in young individuals. Alternatively Zodiac engaged in heavy manual labor, which makes the ridges less prominent on the short term.

I was surprised by this so searched and found this:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328526153_A_Study_of_Age_and_Ageing_in_Fingerprint_Biometrics

Results are page 7 and 8.  There is also the issue of how old a print is when taken, see:

https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2015/08/who-what-when-determining-age-fingerprints

Today they can recover prints from exhumations. Think about that sort of software processing to turn them into healthy looking prints.

Yes, we grow. Single to multi-cellular organisms and we don’t stop changing as all cells are replaced except maybe some neurons. That’s the only part of us that is the still the same after we were born. Everything else has been replaced, lol.

I want to bring up the point of DNA here as I mentioned it elsewhere.

They recovered DNA from the alleged hoax letter.

If Toschi hoaxed the letter, then it’s his DNA. His DNA should be there if he didn’t take care not to leave any (which he should know not to do, on top of knowing how to make the perfect hoax letter if he wanted).

If it’s not his DNA and someone else’s DNA, then that’s a bust on forensics if we want to maintain Toschi hoaxed it, because it would mean contamination of something he hoaxed. Which means abandoning all the deductions made from that DNA and seems to indicate others were also contaminated. Or Toschi was telling the truth and its not his letter and that’s not his DNA but the DNA of the writer. Or contamination.

This shouldn’t take very long for someone working in DNA profiling to take that DNA and match it to Toschi. I would like to say his DNA was on file already to help with forensic processes but since learned that not all law enforcement back then actually gave their DNA or prints into these databases for that sort of thing. I thought it was mandatory but seems nope. Hence DeAngelo.