Facts & Evidence - Ted Kaczynski As The Zodiac

[Norse]

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?

[AK Wilks]

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.

[Norse]

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.

[vasa croe]

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.

[AK Wilks]

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.

[Dreamnine.nine]

I believe that out of sheer embarrassment and hubris the FBI would never admit that Ted was responsible for the Tylenol killings - even if they knew for certain that he was.

[AK Wilks]

I believe that out of sheer embarrassment and hubris the FBI would never admit that Ted was responsible for the Tylenol killings - even if they knew for certain that he was.

Dreamnine! Good to see you. What did you think of the recent vote in Scotland? Were you on the independence side or the better together side? Anyway good to see you, always enjoy your comments and thoughts on the Z case, Percy, Tylenol and Ted, pro, con or otherwise.

Yes as time goes by I tend to think you are probably right. The recent yearly budget for the FBI was $8 billion. And every year they ask for more and more. Yet look at their record. Waco, Ruby Ridge, framing of innocent man Richard Jewel, the failure to arrest terrorists at flight schools prior to 9-11, a 25,000 name suspect list in Unabomber but Ted's name not on it, etc., etc. And what major serial killer case have they ever solved?

As far as a mere citizen helping them with information and analysis, their attitude is basically thanks but no thanks, we know everything and don't need any help. They have supercomputers, crime labs and $8 billion budgets. But what they lack is a capacity for creative thought and ability to think outside the box. I got one FBI agent to think that it could be Ted in Tylenol so they asked him for DNA, but the follow up has been weak.

So yes I think it would be very embarrassing for them if citizens were shown to have solved cases like Zodiac and Tylenol which they could not solve.

[Dreamnine.nine]

I believe that out of sheer embarrassment and hubris the FBI would never admit that Ted was responsible for the Tylenol killings - even if they knew for certain that he was.

Dreamnine! Good to see you. What did you think of the recent vote in Scotland? Were you on the independence side or the better together side? Anyway good to see you, always enjoy your comments and thoughts on the Z case, Percy, Tylenol and Ted, pro, con or otherwise.

Yes as time goes by I tend to think you are probably right. The recent yearly budget for the FBI was $8 billion. And every year they ask for more and more. Yet look at their record. Waco, Ruby Ridge, framing of innocent man Richard Jewel, the failure to arrest terrorists at flight schools prior to 9-11, a 25,000 name suspect list in Unabomber but Ted's name not on it, etc., etc. And what major serial killer case have they ever solved?

As far as a mere citizen helping them with information and analysis, their attitude is basically thanks but no thanks, we know everything and don't need any help. They have supercomputers, crime labs and $8 billion budgets. But what they lack is a capacity for creative thought and ability to think outside the box. I got one FBI agent to think that it could be Ted in Tylenol so they asked him for DNA, but the follow up has been weak.

So yes I think it would be very embarrassing for them if citizens were shown to have solved cases like Zodiac and Tylenol which they could not solve.

I was on the Independence side, AK, but the better together campaign had the entire UK establishment, (left and right wing), the largely English media, the banks, the insurance companies, the military and the Royal Family going for it. It wasn't really a fair vote in my opinion. I despise the BBC and will never view their content again. Plus, I'll never regard myself as British.

As for the FBI, yeah, I think you're right. And if Ted wasn't responsible for the Tylenol killings, then who was? No better suspects have emerged in 30+ years.

[Darla Jones]

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.

I thought this might be a relevant article to this discussion. The DNA is not so cut and dry. I think they have his DNA, but they are not sure how reliable it is. Maybe they only have a partial DNA and the part of the code they have for the Tylenol case is the part that is missing from Ted's DNA fingerprint. Also, there is the problem of having a DNA on letters that are clearly from him that don't match his DNA. It's say that is an indication that the DNA they have on file has been contaminated with someone else's DNA. The collection and processing methods used now are much, much better than even 5 years ago. They probably know this and want a new sample.

___________________________________________________

http://articles.latimes.com/1997-03-04/ ... se-lawyers

Defense Asks Judge to Bar Evidence in Unabomber Case
March 04, 1997|MARK GLADSTONE | TIMES STAFF WRITER
Email
Share

SACRAMENTO — Attorneys for accused Unabomber Theodore J. Kaczynski on Monday urged a federal judge to toss out evidence seized nearly a year ago at Kaczynski's Montana cabin, saying the FBI was "deliberately misleading" in obtaining a search warrant.

In several hundred pages of documents filed late Monday, defense lawyers Quin Denvir and Judy Clarke maintained that the FBI "simply failed to provide any trustworthy information that would convince a reasonably prudent person that Mr. Kaczynski committed the Unabomb crimes."

To buttress their argument, the defense lawyers provided a detailed critique of the 104-page search warrant affidavit that sought to establish links between Kaczynski and the Unabomber.

In particular, they contend that the government misrepresented DNA evidence, failed to disclose information that Kaczynski did not match the description of the Unabomber "in virtually any respect," and covered up evidence showing that Kaczynski had an alibi for a 1985 fatal bombing in Sacramento.

As a result, the defense lawyers are asking U.S. Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. to exclude all evidence seized in April at Kaczynski's remote cabin.

That evidence includes a stack of documents that prosecutors have described as the backbone of the case against the former UC Berkeley mathematics professor, including entries in which they say he took responsibility for the deadly, coast-to-coast trail of 16 bombings.

An FBI spokesman declined to comment on the defense legal brief.

After Kaczynski's arrest, the government released a list of evidence removed by FBI agents from his cabin, including bomb components, notebooks and typewriters that allegedly tied him to the bombings that started in 1978 and killed three and injured 23.

In June, a federal grand jury indicted Kaczynski in four Unabomber-related explosions, including two fatal attacks--the 1985 death of Sacramento computer store owner Hugh Scrutton and the 1995 death of Capitol timber industry lobbyist Gilbert Murray. Kaczynski, 54, remains in Sacramento County Jail awaiting trial.

Seeking to poke holes in the government's case, Kaczynski's lawyers said that documents available to the FBI provided their client with an alibi for the 1985 Sacramento bombing.

"Specifically, bank records and information from bank officials all showed Mr. Kaczynski personally making a deposit in Helena, Mont., on the date of a Unabomb event in Sacramento," according to defense documents.

Another major point made by the defense was that the government's search warrant affidavit failed to reveal that DNA testing excluded Kaczynski as the source of DNA on two Unabomb letters and probably excluded him as the source of DNA on a third letter.

A third issue in dispute involves the description of the Unabomb suspect given in 1987 by an eyewitness who saw a man plant an explosive device in the rear parking lot of a Salt Lake City computer store.

In contrast to the witness' description, Kaczynski was 14 to 19 years older, 1 to 3 inches shorter and had a more muscular build, according to the defense team.

Authorities had been searching for the Unabomber since 1978, when his first attack came at Northwestern University, north of Chicago. The FBI gave the case the code name "Unabomb" because early targets included universities and airlines.

[AK Wilks]

This sentence:
"Another major point made by the defense was that the government's search warrant affidavit failed to reveal that DNA testing excluded Kaczynski as the source of DNA on two Unabomb letters and probably excluded him as the source of DNA on a third letter."

Is based on a comparison of DNA found on a stamp on a letter from Ted to David to DNA from a stamp on a letter sent by the Unabomber. There was never a DNA draw from Ted himself. I very much doubt the DNA on the Unabomber stamp was from Ted. He was well aware of DNA and outlined a procedure he used for stamps on Unabomber letters. He covered his hands in plastic and would not lick the stamps but dip them in a saucer of water.

I confirmed with the former director of the FBI CODIS program that they never had a sample directly from Ted.

But the FBI records, from Ted's own journals and their analysis, show that he had a very careful procedure he used with ALL stamps he bought, regardless of whether they were to be used on bomb packages, letters to newspapers or to family. This is the procedure, as recounted on p. xxi in the book "Unabomber: A Desire To Kill", by Robert Graysmith:

"The previous night he had specially treated the "O'Neill" stamps along with the others - "Lucy Stone" fifty cent stamps, "Frederick Douglass" twenty five cent stamps and another dollar stamp, "America's Light Fueled by Truth and Reason". THE SOLITARY MAN HAD SOAKED THEM IN SALT WATER, THEN RUBBED THEM WITH SOY BEAN OIL TO ERASE ANY FINGERPRINTS THAT MIGHT HAVE SLIPPED PAST HIS IMPROVISED PLASTIC WRAP "GLOVES" "

Ted never licked stamps or anything else. From 1978 to 1995, the FBI "knew the technophobic bomber never licked labels" or envelope flaps or stamps - but then in 1995 he just "slipped up" and licked a stamp? Graysmith book, pp. 279 and 324. That is highly, highly unlikely. There is a reason the FBI after an 18 year $60 million investigation had a 25,000 person suspect list that did not have Ted's name on it. He simply made very few slips up of any kind, and never made a major mistake. Kaczynski knew all about DNA - he sent a bomb to leading genetic scientist Dr. Epstien and had the name and home address of the inventor of the PCR DNA method, Kary Mullis, on a death list in his cabin. He thought DNA was yet another way the "techno - nerds" would try to control humanity.

We must also consider that the Unabomber case was happening in the time period of the FBI lab scandal. The lab was found to have grossly violated procedures involving contamination. There were proven accusations of incompetence, contamination violations, bias, unsound procedures, and even perjury and out right fabrication. In regards to the Unabomber case specifically, the explosives analysis was grossly unsound and partially fabricated - that is what the Department of Justice Inspector General found. See http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/9704a/17unabom.htm . In relevant part:

"Furthermore, the concerns raised by Burmeister about Rudolph's conclusions appear in several instances to be well-founded. The Laboratory did not adequately address these concerns after they were brought to the attention of Mohnal and Laboratory management in September 1995. Rudolph's work on UNABOM displays the same problems of inadequate documentation and conclusions not supported by sufficient data that we noted in the more general discussion in Part Three, Section A above.

A qualified explosives residue examiner should undertake a detailed review of all of Rudolph's UNABOM work before it is used further in the case. In response to a draft of this section of the report, Robert Cleary, a Special Attorney to the U.S. Attorney General, advised the OIG that the Government would not be relying upon any of Rudolph's work in the UNABOM case as part of the prosecution of Theodore J. Kaczyski, who has been indicted on charges related to bombings attributed to the Unabomber. Cleary stated that to the extent the Government will offer explosive residue evidence in the Kaczyski case, it will be relying upon the conclusions of Burmeister and other, non-FBI laboratories."

Thus, the Justice Department agreed NOT to use FBI Lab results because they were so tainted. Lawyers for Kaczynski asserted it was "impossible" for the FBI to have obtained his DNA. In regards to DNA, this is what the writers of a book on the lab scandal found:

"The IG follow-up report dealt only with the explosives unit. But since the publication of our book in the United States, we have investigated the operations of the DNA unit which the IG claimed was a model of scientific integrity. We found that the original IG investigation discovered quite the contrary. That the DNA unit was seriously negligent, but the IG covered up this finding. We discovered that Drs. Greg Parsons and Martin Alevy of the DNA unit had refused to testify on behalf of the FBI because they felt the DNA testing could be faulty, unreliable, and inaccurate. They felt so strongly about this that they left the lab to resume being street agents with a cut in pay and rank.

The head of the DNA unit, Dr. Jenifer Lindsey Smith, and her subordinates totally botched the DNA testing in the Unabomber case such that the prosecution would not have been able to use the results if Unabomber suspect Ted Kaczynski had gone to trial. Smith did not even bother to obtain a sample of Kaczynski's actual DNA, and an FBI affidavit lied that there was a match found between the Unabomber's DNA and Kaczynski's DNA. "

Tainting Evidence: Inside the Scandal at the FBI Crime Lab, John Kelly and Phillip K Wearne

In short, there is very good reason to doubt that Kaczynski DNA is on any Unabomber stamp or personal stamp. And we now know that Kaczynski DNA frrom his body has never been put into CODIS. Federal law requires all convicted prisoners in federal custody to have DNA taken. Yet it has never happened. Kaczynski has never had DNA drawn from his body. So nobody knows what it is, and it may or may not match DNA in the Zodiac, Tylenol or other cases.

There are persons in law enforcement trying to make it happen, but there is a lot more politics and red tape involved than I thought.