* DXer on … Dr. Bruce Ivins’ alibi … and the withholding of information required by law to be disclosed … LMW: why are DOJ/FBI withholding these facts? … Congressman Holt: “the FBI has consistently botched and bungled this investigation from the beginning”

******

mailboxes in Princeton ... a long way from Frederick ... especially if you're still in Frederick when the letters were mailed

******

DXer comments …

• To simplify the matter — so that we can get all get on the same page — consider this.
• AUSA Rachel Lieber and Kenneth Kohl have not disclosed to you the time of an email they rely upon that Bruce Ivins wrote to Mara Linscott on September 17, 2001.
• Nor have they disclosed the times and content of other emails he wrote the day they allege he traveled to Princeton to mail the letters sometime after 7 p.m. in the evening.
• The investigators and prosecutors would not disclose the alleged “window of mailing” to Dr. Ivins or his attorney until after his suicide.  It was left open to include a several day period … until after Dr. Ivins’ death.
• If they had disclosed that the mailing occurred after 7 p.m., the issue of Dr. Ivins’ alibi could have been fairly considered based on the documentary evidence.

The DOJ and FBI should disclose a redacted copy of those emails

— showing the time they were sent —

without further delay.

The law (FOIA) requires it.

******

LMW COMMENT …

Why don’t our Justice Department and the FBI feel obligated to follow the law? I call that covering up the truth. Congressman Holt called it a  “botched and bungled investigation.”  See …

* Congressman Holt’s letter to FBI Director Mueller: ” … it now appears that the FBI—which has consistently botched and bungled this case from the beginning—may be seeking to try to steer or otherwise pressure the NAS panel to reach a conclusion desired by the Bureau. I ask that you meet with me this week to explain the FBI’s troubling conduct in this matter …”

******

** Lew’s web interview 2-7-11 … mostly about the anthrax case

* CASE CLOSED – opening scene … the DIA re-investigates the FBI’s failed case

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

* proof that Dr. Ivins could not have mailed the September 18 letters … proof that the FBI cannot be correct when they insist that Ivins was the sole perpetrator … President Obama must not derail the Holt commission, the only chance we have to learn the truth in this murderous attack on America

.

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.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

The FBI claims that Dr. Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks, and thus that he personally mailed the letters which were postmarked in Princeton with a date of September 18, 2001.

But, from DXer’s recent comments, based on documents recently released, it appears that …

• Ivins was on a roadtrip with co-workers to Covance on September 18, 2001. Notebook 4240 entries concern immunization of rabbits at Covance for antiserum

And, from other records DXer has obtained, it seems Ivins could not have been in Princeton the prior evening if he was …

• at a Red Cross meeting in Frederick on the night of September 17, 2001

These are easily verified matters. There are witnesses who can say where Ivins was, or that he was not where the records say he was. Yet the FBI has presented nothing publicly to either prove, or more likely disprove, their continued unsupported allegations that Ivins did it all alone.

How can anyone have confidence in the FBI in the face of these disclosures, which, by the way, the FBI kept hidden for years, even after they announced in August 2008 that the case would soon be closed?

My conclusion … the FBI’s pathetic case against Dr. Ivins is a fraud, and either …

1. The FBI has failed to solve the case, or
2. The FBI has solved the case, it isn’t Ivins, and they are protecting the identity of the real perpetrators

It is up to Congressman Holt’s proposed investigative commission, which President Obama must not be allowed to derail, to get at the truth in this matter. Whoever killed five people is still out there.

* Did the FBI retrieve contents from the Dr. Ivins’ Apple computer in the hot suite?

* fom DXer … Did Dr. Bruce Ivins attend his regular Red Cross meeting on one of the days the FBI says he was mailing anthrax letters in Princeton?

.

The New York Times says the FBI’s anthrax case has “too many loose ends.” Find out where some of those looses ends might have originated in my novel CASE CLOSED. Sure it’s fiction, but many readers, including a highly respected member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, think my premise is actually “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

.

* Dr. Bruce Ivins calendar for September and October of 2001

.

The New York Times says the FBI’s anthrax case has “too many loose ends.” Find out where some of those looses ends might have originated in my novel CASE CLOSED. Sure it’s fiction, but many readers, including a highly respected member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, think my premise is actually “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

.

* from DXer … Dr. Bruce Ivins had group therapy sessions scheduled on both September 17, 2001 and on October 8, 2001, the same dates the FBI says he was mailing the anthrax letters

.

The New York Times says the FBI’s anthrax case has “too many loose ends.” Find out where some of those looses ends might have originated in my novel CASE CLOSED. Sure it’s fiction, but many readers, including a highly respected member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, think my premise is actually “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

.

* delay and more delay in the release of Dr. Bruce Ivins’ emails from the period of October 9, 2001 through November 30, 2001 … UPDATE: new emails have just been released

.

The New York Times says the FBI’s anthrax case has “too many loose ends.” Find out where some of those looses ends might have originated in my novel CASE CLOSED. Sure it’s fiction, but many readers, including a highly respected member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, think my premise is actually “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

******

An email was sent today to JOHN PETERSON at U.S. Army Medical Command headquarters, asking…

• when will the next batch of Dr. Ivins’ emails be released?
• when the entire group from October/November 2001 will be available?

UPDATE: new emails have just been released

DXer COMMENT …

• Why has FBI Spokesman Michael Kortan countenanced the USAMRIID’s failure to produce Ivins’ emails from October 2001 and November 2001 for the past 1 1/2 years?
• Why would an individual touting the disclosures made by the FBI — correctly noting the number of pages — not feel a sense of responsibility that relevant documents were provided?
• The USAMRIID FOIA people (Ferrara, Peterson) have always said that the delay was due to FBI and DOJ interference.
• Given that no one is associating their name to the report other than Michael Kortan, isn’t he one to ask why they haven’t produced Ivins’ emails?
• At the very least, shouldn’t he be saying that the FOIA production is ongoing and that it is being expedited given the inexcusable 1 1/2 year delay?

******

* is that the FBI’s entire case against Dr. Ivins? Only by charging a dead man and avoiding the need to prove their case in court could the FBI make their paper-thin allegation that Dr. Ivins was the sole perpetrator … or even involved at all

Dr. Bruce Ivins

NPR interview of Dina Temple-Raston (2-19-10) …

NPR’s Dina Temple-Raston was tracking the story for us two years ago when Ivins first surfaced as the FBI’s main suspect, and she joins me now. Dina, the FBI says Ivins was their man a year and half ago. And now today they’re formerly closing the case. What exactly does it mean to close the case?

DINA TEMPLE-RASTON: Well, by formally closing the case, the FBI is no longer bound by grand jury secrecy requirements. So that means they can release a lot of the evidence that we didn’t get to see back in August of 2008 when the story broke.

SIEGEL: Well, does the new evidence that came out today, does it settle once and for all that Ivins did it?

TEMPLE-RASTON: Well, the fact that Ivins killed himself without a note before he was charged means that I think there will always be doubts in this case. But basically this is how the FBI lays out the case –

• that the strain of anthrax that was used in the attacks was a strain that Ivins and only a handful of other people had access to.

NOTE: In the Amerithrax Investigative Summary, the FBI puts the number higher than even Ivins’ defenders.  They say over 350 had access.

• And the FBI says that they’ve eliminated the other people as suspects.
• Back during that timeframe in 2001, Ivins was spending a lot of long hours in the lab alone and there was no big project going on the lab in September 2001 that would’ve justified his time there.
• And then Ivins explained the hours by saying he was having a difficult home life and was trying to get away from it.
• But he kept changing his story, so it made the FBI sort of doubt that excuse.

SIEGEL: There were reports in 2008 of some disturbing emails that Ivins had sent.

TEMPLE-RASTON: Exactly. The last time they released some information about this,

• the FBI released some emails that showed that he might have had some mental health issues,
• talking about feeling like he was two people and not one.
• He was stalking a co-worker. He was sending her presents and going to different cities to send them.
• These were all things that worried the FBI because the anthrax mailings were actually mailed from various cities with fake addresses.

read the entire interview at … http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123898323

LMW COMMENT …

and here’s what the FBI is not telling us …

• there is no physical evidence linking Dr. Ivins to the murders
• there are no witnesses linking Dr. Ivins to the preparation or mailing of the attack anthrax
• the timeline the FBI has proposed, for Ivins preparing the “weaponized” anthrax or going to Princeton to mail the letters, is impossible
• the DNA science, at best, links Dr. Ivins to a beaker to which 350 other scientists may have had access

******

CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein is a novel which answers the question …

why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

* why have Dr. Ivins’ emails concerning his whereabouts when the anthrax letters were mailed in Princeton not been released? who is withholding this information?

CASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question … Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case? Here’s the (fictional) DIA Director giving the charge to his team re-investigating the FBI anthrax investigation …

“Those FBI bastards hounded a Defense Department employee until he committed suicide, if it was suicide. After seven years the FBI hasn’t come close to making a case that could convict the lowest grade criminal, let alone an internationally respected scientist. And they think they can say ‘case closed’ and sweep their incompetent investigation under the rug?”

“I’ve already spoken to Secretary Morgan,” General Drysdale continued. “The Secretary agrees that the Defense Department is taking an unwarranted hit from the FBI, and we don’t know why. At my request, the Secretary has authorized us to find out what really happened.

“You’re the team I’ve selected. You’re authorized to go where you need to go, ask what you need to know. You’ll have whatever resources are necessary.

Click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

in paperback or kindle

******

why have Dr. Ivins’ emails

concerning his whereabouts when the anthrax letters

were mailed in Princeton

not been released?

who is withholding this information?

******

DXer’s comment …

Dr. Bruce Ivins

It used to be reasoned that the mailer would be living alone — because otherwise his wife would know.  Dr. Ivins’ wife, in a private note to Dr. Ivins, stated that she knew he had nothing to do with it.  That is a pretty compelling piece of evidence as to her private thoughts.  Especially after the first mailing when the public was sensitive to the matter, the FBI would not have met its burden on the evidence disclosed that Dr. Ivins could have travelled without being observed.

In terms of what has NOT yet been disclosed, there likely are contemporaneous emails from those days that both would establish his location at some particular times and would refer to how he was spending his time generally.

It thus is worth noting that the most probative evidence, such as contemporaneous emails from the dates they allege processing and mailing and Lab Notebook 4010, are being withheld.

Instead the affidavit in support of probable cause for a search referred only to his inability to justify his time in a 2005 interview (or at least that is their characterization). At the same time there was a FOIA for exit/entry times, there was a FOIA for emails.

Why are they withholding the emails? They were processed many months ago but are being withheld.  The FBI’s unsupported factual assertion of travel therefore is in the context of a refusal to provide the documents that might corroborate or contradict their assertion.  If someone cannot back up their claims and refuses to provide documentary support, a logical inference is that the evidence does not support the claim.

Anonymous Scientist’s comment …

I think this is a very good observation. If Ivins sent time-stamped emails on the days he supposedly drove to Princeton to mail the letters this immediately destroys the FBI’s theory. There would have to be at least 12 hour windows of zero emails sent in a distinct pattern. There would also have to be 12 hour windows of zero cell phone usage, zero credit card usage etc.

I think it’s obvious they DON’T have this – and they know fully well that releasing emails will immediately have internet bloggers all over the emails analyzing them for gaping holes in the FBI’s theory.

Michael Green (see below) also pointed out that the FBI failed completely to adequately describe how Ivins made the powder and Green similarly concluded that the reason the never explained it is simple – they couldn’t.

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/green/FBIFrameupOfIvins.html

It is important not to distract ourselves with the task of resolving exactly what attributes the Senate anthrax spores had — attributes that the FBI and DOJ have deliberately kept secret and muddled through confusing and contradictory press leaks and releases. It is wiser to rely on the obvious inference that if the FBI had a simple, straightforward, true and compelling story to tell about how Ivins could have made such a deadly powder in a few brief spates at night, they would have told it.

They did not tell it because they did not have it.

******

* no proof FBI’s anthrax suspect was in Princeton

August 14, 2008 … Hair Samples in Anthrax Case Don’t Match – By Carrie Johnson, Washington Post Staff Writer

Federal investigators recovered samples of human hair from a mailbox in Princeton, N.J., but the strands did not match the lead suspect in the case

Defense lawyer Paul F. Kemp yesterday said he wonders “where Ivins could have possibly stored this anthrax without any employees seeing it, or if he took it home, why there was no trace” of the deadly spores, despite repeated FBI searches over the past two years of Ivins’s car, his work locker, a safe-deposit box and his house

investigators have come up dry in their efforts to find direct evidence to place Ivins at the Nassau Street mailbox in September and October 2001.

read the entire article at … http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/13/AR2008081303731.html