The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”
does not distinguish assertions from evidence
… he does not understand the grand jury process
… nor does he believe that every person is innocent
until PROVEN guilty
ED LAKE says … But that was NOT the case with Ivins. With Ivins it was ALL ABOUT FACTS. As the Amerithrax investigation proceeded, the facts just kept accumulating and pointing to Ivins. Any “theory,” if there was a theory, was a theory that Ivins didn’t do it alone. The conspiracy theorists held that theory. However, <b>he FACTS showed that theory to be untrue. No one could find ANY facts which showed that Ivins had a partner in the crime. All the known facts said Ivins did it by himself. The grand jury had enough facts to indict Ivins. Ivins had no defense. He was given a chance to ask for a deal, but he didn’t ask. So, he was facing the death penalty.
Perhaps, Ed, you could make a list of what these facts are that you keep referring to.
- What evidence shows that only Ivins had access to the RMR1029 access?
- Where is the evidence that eliminates the many others who had access?
- What evidence shows that Ivins could have produced the anthrax powder, or that he could have done so without attracting attention? Did anyone see him do it?
- What evidence says he went to Princeton to mail the letters, or that his absence was noted by a single human being?
Regarding your statements about a grand jury, do you have any idea how unlikely it would be for any grand jury to refuse to indict on a case of this magnitude, regardless of the weakness of the evidence? Do you understand that no defense case is ever presented to a grand jury? That no defense lawyer ever gets to review and question the assertions made by the prosecution to a grand jury?
Did you ever serve on a grand jury? I did, and I can tell you that prosecutors get close to 100% indictments, many on paper-thin cases. On my grand jury, with me taking the lead, that percentage was reduced to about 35% indictments, and the prosecutors were still talking about it 25 years later.
Do you have evidence that a plea bargain was offered to Ivins? If so, what were the terms? Regardless of the terms, any attorney who suggested that Ivins take a plea bargain in the face of the FBI’s pathetic case should be disbarred for incompetence. There was no case.
The FBI got very lucky when Ivins allegedly committed suicide (have you ever seen an autopsy report?) because now they had a suspect who could never defend himself in court, a very convenient outcome for the FBI/DOJ/Bush administration.
Ed, just saying that Ivins was guilty, as you and the FBI (and no one else that I know) assert, is not evidence.
It is frightening to me that any intelligent person does not understand the difference between assertions and evidence, or so blithely ignores the fundamental proposition that any person is innocent until PROVEN guilty.