CASE CLOSED … what really happened in the 2001 anthrax attacks?

* Attorney Paul Kemp: the FBI investigation revealed no evidence against Ivins because he was not guilty

Posted by DXer on June 3, 2011


Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Dr. Ivins’ Attorney Paul Kemp and Dr. James Van de Velde at the November 29 anthrax seminar sponsored by the University of California Institute for Global Conflict and Cooperation and the UC Washington Center


Katherine Heerbrandt writes for (6/2/11) …

  • Frederick attorney Paul Kemp believes he failed his former client, suspected anthrax killer Bruce Ivins, by not inspiring him to have more faith in the justice system.
  • Kemp identified holes in the FBI’s evidence against Ivins.
    • Despite nine search warrants that included his house, car and any vehicle he drove, the FBI obtained no solid evidence of Ivins’ complicity in the anthrax murders, Kemp said.
    • Nor could the FBI prove that Ivins was anywhere near Princeton, N.J., the source of the mailings, during the time in question.

“The investigation revealed no evidence against Ivins

because he was not guilty,” Kemp said. 

  • A May 19 article in the Miami Herald accuses the FBI of not pursuing other leads that could have led investigators to different conclusions, including the chemical makeup of the aerosolized anthrax in the FBI’s own laboratory reports.
  • In February, a panel of independent scientists questioned the veracity of the science used to name Ivins the killer.
  • Congressman Holt has called for a congressional commission to investigate the anthrax attacks, but that has been tabled for now because the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is in the process of reviewing the FBI case and plans to have a report out in the fall.

Kemp is convinced that the government

could not have convicted Ivins

on the evidence it had at the time of his death.

read the entire article at …

8 Responses to “* Attorney Paul Kemp: the FBI investigation revealed no evidence against Ivins because he was not guilty”

  1. DXer said

    Mark Kortepeter, in his new book IN THE HOT ZONE, quoted Paul F. Kemp, Bruce’s attorney, who called “the investigation ‘an orchestrated dance of carefully worded statements, heaps of innuendo, and a staggering lack of real evidence’ that appeared to have been successful in its objective.” (citation omitted)

    Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense

  2. DXer said

    ‘The Suspect’ Co-Author On The FBI’s Misguided Investigation Into Richard Jewell

  3. DXer said

    Dr. Adamovicz testified in the civil deposition produced today under FOIA:

    “”There was no physical evidence showing in New Jersey at the time of the mailings, no traffic cameras, no gas station receipts, no witnesses.

    There was no genetic evidence of his on any of the evidence that was recovered, no fingerprints, no handwriting analysis showing a match. There was essentially a lack of any physical evidence linking him to these mailings.

    More importantly, the stated motivation for him to have conducted this crime is fallacious. It’s not correct, because the assertion is that he was going to make a lot of money. He’s not. He never was motivated by money.

    … Well, they did assert that he would benefit personally by — because the licensure on the vaccine that he was working on would somehow flow back into his pockets. And that’s simply not true. As a government employee, he saw — he, just as other co-inventors, saw very little in terms of monetary remuneration in terms what they get off the new anthrax vaccines.” (p. 97)


    “you could pick any particular individual who has seen their star rise over time in the research field and almost, you know, without exception they’re all outside of the DOD laboratory system.” (p . 98)

  4. DXer said

    In the A-Z listing of third party commentators, I omitted defense counsel Paul Kemp who has presented powerfully, more than once, on Dr. Ivins’ innocence. Attorney Kemp in the rush of events of July 2008 had no opportunity to force production of emails, notebooks and other documents that the FBI would not provide Bruce.

    Emails show Bruce’s attempts to get copies of his notebooks returned but Lab Notebook 4241 relating to the rabbit formaldehyde experiment was not returned.

    The IT department explained to Dr. ivins that there was no way to retrieve his earlier emails. People can’t remember emails from years ago. They need the emails and many people don’t keep their emails dating years earlier.

    Requests he made for other laboratory documents in advance of the grand jury went unheeded — with an “oops, I forgot, sorry about that Bruce” email.

    Others (the cage cards from the experiment in late September 2001/early October 2001) were destroyed in 2004 by the animal lab tech.

    Indeed, Dr. Ivins was barred from returning to his office. Given what an eloquent and polished counsel Mr. Kemp is, I am hoping that he has an associate at his firm, pro bono, pick up the issue of the rabbits He’s former DOJ and they are able to hire top notch, experienced litigators. They only get better as they return to private practice. I am working to get him additional documents about the rabbit study that are not redacted.

    • DXer said

      Attorney Kemp alternatively could pitch the matter to the pro bono department of a large DC law firm. They have the resources and a portion of each young attorney’s time can be devoted to a pro bono case approved by committee. As Glenn Greenwald, the most influential blogger ever, wrote:

      “It requires an extreme level of irrationality to read what happened to Hatfill and simultaneously to have faith that the “real anthrax attacker” has now been identified as a result of the FBI’s wholly untested and uninvestigated case against Bruce Ivins. The parallels are so overwhelming as to be self-evident.”

      Young attorneys at a large DC law firm would chew the FBI’s case up in no time and then Attorney Kemp could carry the ball across the goal line as QB.

      I recommend those nattily dressed A&P lawyers with the embossed briefcases. Paul, they are waiting for your call.

      Wednesday, Apr 21, 2010 07:22 AM EDT
      Unlearned lessons from the Steven Hatfill case

      The Government’s behavior in the anthrax investigation highlights the dangers of untested, unproven accusations
      By Glenn Greenwald

      (updated below)

      Andrew Sullivan rightly recommends this new Atlantic article by David Freed, which details how the FBI and a mindless, stenographic American media combined to destroy the life of Steven Hatfill. Hatfill is the former U.S. Government scientist who for years was publicly depicted as the anthrax attacker and subjected to Government investigations so invasive and relentless that they forced him into almost total seclusion, paralysis and mental instability, only to have the Government years later (in 2008) acknowledge that he had nothing to do with those attacks and to pay him $5.8 million to settle the lawsuit he brought. There are two crucial lessons that ought to be learned from this horrible — though far-from-rare — travesty:

      (1) It requires an extreme level of irrationality to read what happened to Hatfill and simultaneously to have faith that the “real anthrax attacker” has now been identified as a result of the FBI’s wholly untested and uninvestigated case against Bruce Ivins. The parallels are so overwhelming as to be self-evident.

  5. DXer said

    Attorney Grafft in “Analysis of the Search Warrants of the Amerithrax Investigation” writes:

    “Interestingly, the first three items mentioned in the search warrant return document were cardboard boxes labeled “Paul Kemp … attorney client privilege.” Although the issue of search and seizure of privileged documents has not yet been clearly resolved in the courts, the seizure of documents clearly marked “attorney client privilege” during an ongoing “person of interest” investigation seems to seriously impede a defense counsel’s ability to represent his client against future charges.”

  6. DXer said

    A Legal Analysis of the Search Warrants of the Amerithrax Investigation

    Grafft, Courtney

    Citation Information: Journal of Biosecurity, Biosafety and Biodefense Law.Volume 3, Issue 1
    July 31, 2012


    One of the nation’s most complex investigations in its history stemmed from the 2001 anthrax attack letters. Filled with dead-ends, false leads, and flustered FBI and Postal Inspection officers trying to grapple with intricate scientific details, the Amerithrax investigation caused many to question the efforts of America’s forefront investigative entity. The specialized American bioweapons community remained in a constant state of paranoia from late 2001 to 2008, and over 30,000 members of the American Society for Microbiology received a letter indicating the high probability “that one or more of you know” the anthrax killer. Finally, in 2007 the Amerithrax Task Force named Dr. Bruce Ivins, a civilian bioweapons specialist at the United States Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), who only a few years before helped the officers sort through the complicated task of studying the weaponized anthrax, as the prime suspect. Investigative efforts ratcheted up in fall of 2007 when a series of warrants were issued to search Dr. Ivins’ home, office, and vehicles.Since the ratification of the Fourth Amendment in 1791, the United States has recognized the importance of a system with laws designed to prohibit unfettered investigations by the leaders of our country. This paper analyzes the search warrants utilized in the Dr. Ivins’ investigation and discusses the Fourth Amendment implications. First, a brief review of the state of America in September 2001 is detailed. Next, the paper discusses the facts of the Amerithrax investigation, including the mishap involving Steven Hatfill. Section III explains some Fourth Amendment search warrant basics before getting to the meat of this analysis: the actual search warrants of the Amerithrax investigation.

    Comment: Coming back from the Constitution Center in Philadelphia last week, my 12- year-old asked if a locked box in a school locker was subject to warrantless search. The Fourth Amendment raises an endlessly fascinating array of balancing choices that need to be made in balancing the interests at stake.

    At the time of the November 2007 search, Dr. Ivins explained that the reason he was so physically upset was that they would find a plastic bag of panties in the basement (that turned out to be semen-stained). In July 2008, the FBI swabbed him for DNA for the purpose of comparing it to the semen — as if that had anything at all to do with Amerithrax. The authorities were putting huge psychological pressure on a man that they knew to be very fragile and had previously attempted suicide a few months earlier. They had every reason to be motivated to cover their ass. Attorneys like Tom Connolly, who successfully represented Steve Hatfill and a Blackwater defendant (both cases in which Ken Kohl was the prosecutor), often get their training at the Department of Justice.

  7. Zicon said

    Perhaps Mr Kemp/Law Firm could have kept a better handle on Bruce and knowing full well that he would have been just fine… Also seeing that he was given the right amount of support from any family friends down to a competent psychologist/Dr./MD. etc. Based on everything that has been presented by the FBI/DOJ & if I were a juror and even in the eyes of the “correct law” not what Washington wanted to make up as they went along, Bruce Ivins would have been proven and or found “INNOCENT ALL DAY LONG”… I guarntee that there would have been a lot of things done differently on both sides…A little to late for that one.. We all know that Ivins DID NOT DO THIS… & so does the DOJ/FBI including BUSH Jr. at the time.., & so does Obama. Just my opinon that is still working just as dilligent behind the scenes on it all no matter what anyone does or says. Also no matter what part it has to do with… every bit is just as important no matter which order it’s in or where it comes from…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: