The FBI is claiming that they have solved the anthrax case from 2001 with the apparent suicide of Bruce Ivins. Somehow I don't think this is the whole truth of the story. I am waiting to see the evidence that the FBI promise will be coming. Given the history of various foul-up investigation such as the Atlanta Olympic bombing and the payment to the first suspect of this case, Stephen Hatfill, unless the evidence is overwhelming, it would be difficult for most people to believe that Ivins is the only criminal here.
The events leading to Ivin's suicide produce more questions than answers. Today in the LA Times Jean Carol Dulcey, a psychotherapist, claimed that during a group session Ivins said that he bought a bulletproof vest and gun and was set to kill many people. Dulcey contacted the police and Ivins was admitted to a mental hospital. A few days later he was released. How does someone who said that he bought a gun to kill people and is under investigation by the FBI for multiple murders be released from a mental hospital? Not only that, the FBI then told Ivins that soon he will be indicted for the antrax case. I think if I know someone who is threatening to kill people and I have evidence that he had killed people with biological weapons, I would not tell him ahead of time that I am going to arrest him, giving him time to kill himself and/or others. It almost seems like that the FBI want Ivins to have a chance to commit suicide. Afterall, it is much more difficult for a dead man to defend himself.
Monday, August 04, 2008
3 comments:
Use the following html code to make a clickable link in your comment (instructions in the sidebar). You can test the link by previewing your comment.
<a href="http://angryyellowman.blogspot.com">Angry Yellow Man</a>
The above example will display as Angry Yellow Man
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Maybe I've watched too many spy movies but this does smell of conspiracy. Not all of this adds up and yet why have we not seen any more anthrax cases in 7 years? The targets really had no common bond did they? We may never know the truth and maybe the truth died with him.
ReplyDelete-LBOAYM
Yesterday the government showed its case against Ivins. There are a lot of circumstantial evidence but I am not sure they would stand up on cross-examination. I am not totally convinced that he acted alone. I was under the impression that it is not that easy to turn liquid anthrax into weapons-grade powder form. Did he have all the equipment that he needed and how did he get them?
ReplyDeleteUltimately I don't understand if the DNA evidence were there in 2005, why did the government still concentrated on Steven Hatfill all these years? Meanwhile this supposedly pychotic suspect is still working in one of our most secretive labs? And my question of why did they notified him of his pending indictment instead of just arresting him and then indict him has not been answered.
Totally agree. I couldn't believe the "evidence" that was revealed. The only thing I can think of is they didn't have enough hard evidence and decided to show their hand. Then they would spy on him and try to see if he would trip up at some point. I'm puzzled that they would let him continue to work.
ReplyDelete-LBOAYM