Saw the movie on the Zodiac killer and watched a documentary on it. The documentary clearly stated that DNA eliminated Arthur Lee Allen as the killer. Wonder why that little tidbit was not put in the movie? Why? Because there would be no movie. Also--his finger print did not match the one on file. Have a problem with that, however. Some believe the print they found on the taxi and believed it was the Zodiac's was not the Zodiac's, but possibly a bystander's or even a cop's. They believe this because they know Zodiac wore gloves and it would have been unlikely he'd have been so careless- so did they match the palm print that was on one of the letters with the actual palm print of Arthru Lee Allen? Or to the one they had on file that was found in the cab?
Also--on an episode of Unsolved Mysteries one theory was posed that Ted Kazinski, the Unabomber was the Zodiac killer. Some experts dismissed it, but now that they have Kazinski, did anyone even bother to try and match his DNA with Zodiac's? Or even to the palm print on the Zodiac letter? The expert said he didn't match the profile. But the thing about Zodiac was that he didn't have one particular M.O. He started killing lovers then moved to killing anyone at random. He stabbed or shot his targets. His weapons were not the same. his victims were not the same. Think it could be Kazinski?