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

Home

Top Posts
Recent Posts
Archives
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- August 2017
- February 2017
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- February 2013
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
November 2011

M T W T F S S

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27

28 29 30

« Oct Dec »

* After seeing the discovery he argued should be subject to a protective order, judging from comments to the press, Plaintiff’s Attorney in Stevens v. United States apparently agrees there is no reason that it remain sealed

Posted by DXer on November 13, 2011

******

******

******

******

This entry was posted on November 13, 2011 at 12:28 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. Tagged: *** 2001 anthrax attacks, *** Amerithrax, *** Dr. Bruce Ivins, *** FBI anthrax investigation, Stevens v. United States. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

One Response to “* After seeing the discovery he argued should be subject to a protective order, judging from comments to the press, Plaintiff’s Attorney in Stevens v. United States apparently agrees there is no reason that it remain sealed”

DXer said

January 15, 2014 at 6:43 am
I have not yet asked for the civil depositions by the witnesses who testified about vulnerabiiities to the theft of pathogens. The latter depositions were subject initially to protective orders because they related to reports by Sandia and the IG. But when the protective order was lifted to those reports the protective order was lifted as to the depositions.

Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

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

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

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

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

Connecting to %s

« * How could Dr. Bruce Ivins have moved the large and heavy lyophilizer (3 shelf Freeze Unitop) HL600 from the B5 into the B3? Would even a single one of the prosecutors or investigators be able to do it?

* The Government Has Not Shown Any “Good Cause” That Should Prevent the Unsealing By Judge Daniel T.K. Hurley Of The Depositions Of Bruce Ivins’ Former Assistants Patricia Fellows and Mara Linscott »

%d bloggers like this: