Zodiackillersite.com

Kirkham68 wrote: Was Graysmith aware of Allen in 76 ?

In Zodiac he says that he first heard about ALA in '80. I find that really hard to believe because he had been talking to all the investigators who had told him about all the other suspects as they were being investigated. What is the chance that they wouldn't have said anything about ALA? In '78 he even says that he had a list of suspects that he was checking people against, but I don't know when he supposedly got that.

I remember that he gives a different date in ZU, but I don't have the book.

morf13 wrote:from what I know, the DNA testing being done behind the scenes is not specific to any suspect. (Although,efforts still under way to clear suspects using DNA)

Will we get to know the results ?

billbrasky wrote:

morf13 wrote:from what I know, the DNA testing being done behind the scenes is not specific to any suspect. (Although,efforts still under way to clear suspects using DNA)

Will we get to know the results ?

I hope so in time,for better or for worse

What is a timeline for results roughly? Could we find out in 2018 who is ruled out by certain DNA samples or will it be longer?

I was catching up on the Joseph Newton Chandler III mystery. The one with the guy who died in Ohio and everyone realized he had been living under the name of a child who died in Texas in 1945. It seems that they matched the Y-chromosome DNA in a DNA database to a family name of Nichols or Nicholas. It would not surprise me if that is the plan here. It would not surprise me if law enforcement does that for EARONS, as well.

Any update?

Griggzoid wrote:What is a timeline for results roughly? Could we find out in 2018 who is ruled out by certain DNA samples or will it be longer?

I actually may have an answer on that for you soon

Nick, no Nora wrote:I was catching up on the Joseph Newton Chandler III mystery. The one with the guy who died in Ohio and everyone realized he had been living under the name of a child who died in Texas in 1945. It seems that they matched the Y-chromosome DNA in a DNA database to a family name of Nichols or Nicholas. It would not surprise me if that is the plan here. It would not surprise me if law enforcement does that for EARONS, as well.

Any update?

This has nothing to do with Newton, as far as I know. The Newton thing is its own neat little mystery

Honestly we need some DNA news.

Why are they still holding things back its been almost 50 years !

morf13 wrote:

Nick, no Nora wrote:I was catching up on the Joseph Newton Chandler III mystery. The one with the guy who died in Ohio and everyone realized he had been living under the name of a child who died in Texas in 1945. It seems that they matched the Y-chromosome DNA in a DNA database to a family name of Nichols or Nicholas. It would not surprise me if that is the plan here. It would not surprise me if law enforcement does that for EARONS, as well.

Any update?

This has nothing to do with Newton, as far as I know. The Newton thing is its own neat little mystery

I "think" what Nick no Nora meant was, any DNA taken or turned in, can be matched in all the DNA Data bases. They match you up to relatives & probable relatives, and maybe even the Z if he did his Ancestry,123 and Me or one of the others. Anythings possible!

Actually, DNA testing that people do at Ancestry, 23 and Me or any of the other companies is NOT thrown into a database that law enforcement can search. The only way that LE can access the DNA at those companies is by a valid search warrant which would need to be specific, LE cannot go on a fishing expedition. This is Ancestry's basic statement to LE on the issue:

Law Enforcement Requests in the United States:
Ancestry will release basic subscriber information as defined in 18 USC § 2703(c)(2) about Ancestry users to law enforcement only in response to a valid trial, grand jury or administrative subpoena.

Ancestry will release additional account information or transactional information pertaining to an account (such as search terms, but not including the contents of communications) only in response to a court order issued pursuant to 18 USC § 2703(d).

Contents of communications and any data relating to the health or DNA of an Ancestry user will be released only pursuant to a valid search warrant from a government agency with proper jurisdiction.

If we receive a valid request under U.S. law to preserve records that constitute potentially relevant evidence in legal proceedings, we will preserve, but not disclose, a temporary snapshot of the relevant account records for 90 days pending service of valid legal process as described above.

And here is a link to the entire page to LE.

http://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/lawenforcement

All of the companies have basically the same position on releasing DNA to LE.