They told him they had DNA results when notified of impending charges. Apparently he believed it when he killed himself.

Quote:

One of several places in, near and around rm 19? An office he shared with others? In or near? Who else had access to rm 19? What is near rm 19? Room 20? Or maybe room 18? Who uses those rooms? Was anything found in any of these other rooms near and/or around?

And in his office. And if you've ever been in a classified facility then you know that others do not have access to his office outside of security. The other rooms are irrelevant, it was in his office. Where it should not have been in the first place.

Quote:

Then there is the DNA? Was the DNA that was found his or the spores? Assumed handled by him, or could have been? Could spores that were handled in or near rm 19 have traces of his DNA (if it is his DNA in question) from him spending time in that area? Traces of DNA from skin, his breath, hair possibly, dandruff, particles in the air from a sneeze or cough, etc...? If it was his DNA was DNA from anybody else found? This alleged evidence just brings up more questions?

The spores, that is the new technology, that they were able to determine that the anthrax sent was the same found in his office. So the rest of your questions are not relevant.

Quote:

Not sure since you are comparing him to someone in their right mind? He was medicated, and was taken to an institution within the past few weeks. He's an unstable example of what could or would be considered to be normal! What would he do? He was obviously a nut-job that doesn’t mean he did it. But nothing in his history/behavior says he did either?

So? If anything that proves even further the likelihood of suicide. And besides the fact that he does have a history, even if he did not, it wouldn't be the first time. The DC snipers had nothing in their history like that either.

Quote:

Several places in and near. Could someone else have mixed it in his office and inadvertently contaminated the spores with traces of his DNA (if it is his DNA in question) simply by being in the area? It does seem possible don't you think, depending on how it got there in the first place?

Including his office. Talk about assumptions, could someone else have mixed it in his office is one hell of a one. And how would they have done that in a secured facility exactly?

Quote:

From the article; Once again you are assuming a lot. One of several scientists...

Actually most of the assumptions or yours. Whether or not he does it for the money he was going to receive full retirement benefits. Arguing that someone would kill themselves over something as simple as that would require far more evidence than you have provided.

Quote:

It also seems scientists, for the most part, live to work, and work to live! Taking away his work would be like taking his kids, telling him he is no longer needed and therefore useless. Someone who is apparently as unstable as they wish to present him to be, just might be pushed over the edge with that bit of news!

And you have evidence that other scientists and doctors forced into retirement have killed themselves in large numbers? If he was that concerned with working, with his background and resume he easily could have gotten another job. Problem solved.

Quote:

I am not saying he didn't do it, it just seems suspicious that less than 2 weeks ago they (the FBI) said they would most likely never find the person responsible, Then this guy, a person obviously unstable and lacking in his mental capacity of reasonable mentality commits suicide. We all of a sudden have a winner. We are now expected to accept the fact that this mental reject, who has worked closely with the FBI investigating the very crime he is being accused of committing for over 6 years, went under the radar? With all this evidence just laying about here and/or near, is the guilty party after all?

I don't see it as suspicious at all, if this was some grand conspiracy then they don't make that statement knowing they're going to eventually frame someone. And yes, accepting that this guy went under the radar is not unusual. Particularly if they had no evidence. And investigators make mistakes all the time. Why is this an exception?

Quote:

This is the making of a movie of the week?

A very boring one. Psycho commits suicide after killing or trying to kill someone else happens and isn't too exciting or unusual.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

Ooops almost forgot.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...102326_pf.html
interestingly, the friday washington post story of august 1, reported that that ivins, "had no access to dry, powdered anthrax" at his bioweapons lab. that information was deleted with a completely different story (the one identified above), at the same URL, dated august 2.
did ivins have access to the dry, powdered anthrax? he did have access to liquid anthrax, as that was the substance used in his lab. it's hard to imagine that he could have created dry anthrax in his lab because if he had been making dry anthrax, it would have been detectable. i don't know how he obtained dry anthrax; but it seems to be a question which does need an answer ... assuming anyone is looking for the real answers

... Several scientists who worked with Ivins also question whether he would have had the technical skills to create the sophisticated powder used in the anthrax attack. Creating the kind of highly lethal, easily dispersible powder used in the 2001 attacks requires unique skills not normally associated with vaccine specialists.
"He had no access to dry, powdered anthrax, according to Fort Detrick spokespersons, who said that only liquid anthrax was used at the Fort Detrick facility in animal aerosolization experiments," said Meryl Nass, a physician and bioterrorism expert. "If he had been making dry anthrax, it would have been detectable."

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

Yep this what they call an open and shut case, but there are still unanswered questions. Not to mention the other cases the FBI has jumped to the wrong conclusion over!

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080806/D92CFQ1O0.html

Quote:

Some questions may be answered when documents related to the case are released, as soon as Wednesday. For others, the answers may be incomplete, even bizarre. Some may simply never be answered. It is unclear how the FBI eliminated as suspects others in the lab who had access to the anthrax. It's not clear what, if any, evidence bolsters the theory that the attacks may have been a twisted effort to test a cure for the toxin. Investigators also can't place Ivins in Princeton, N.J., when the letters were mailed from a mailbox there. Richard Schuler, attorney for anthrax victim Robert Stevens' widow, Maureen Stevens, said his client will attend Wednesday's FBI briefing with a list of questions. "No. 1 is, 'Did Bruce Ivins mail the anthrax that killed Robert Stevens?'" Schuler said, adding, "I've got healthy skepticism." Critics of the bureau in and out of government say that in major cases, like the anthrax investigation, it can be difficult for the bureau to stop once it embarks on a single-minded pursuit of a suspect, with any internal dissenters shut out as disloyal subordinates. Before the FBI focused on Ivins, its sights were set on Hatfill, whose career as a bioscientist was ruined after then-Attorney General John Ashcroft named him a "person of interest" in the probe. Hatfill sued the agency, which recently agreed to pay Hatfill nearly $6 million to settle the lawsuit. Complaints that the FBI behaved too aggressively conflict with its straight-laced, crime-fighting image of starched agents hunting terrorists. During its focus on Hatfill, the FBI conducted what became known as "bumper lock surveillance," in which investigators trailed Hatfill so closely that he accused agents of running over his foot with their surveillance vehicle. FBI agents showed up once to videotape Hatfill in a hotel hallway in Tyson's Corner, Va., when Hatfill was meeting with a prospective employer, according to FBI depositions filed in Hatfill's lawsuit against the government. He didn't get the job. One of the FBI agents who helped run the anthrax investigation, Robert Roth, said FBI Director Robert Mueller had expressed frustration with the pace of the investigation. He also acknowledged that, under FBI guidelines, targets of surveillance aren't supposed to know they're being followed. "Generally, it's supposed to be covert," Roth told lawyers in Hatfill's lawsuit. In the 1996 Atlanta Olympic park bombing that dragged Jewell into the limelight, the security guard became the focus of the FBI probe for three months, after initially being hailed as a hero for moving people away from the bomb before it exploded. The bomber turned out to be anti-government extremist Eric Rudolph, who also planted three other bombs in the Atlanta area and in Birmingham, Ala. Those explosives killed a police officer, maimed a nurse and injured several other people. In another case, the FBI used as evidence the secrets that a person tells a therapist. In the Wen Ho Lee case, Lee became the focus of a federal probe into how China may have obtained classified nuclear warhead blueprints. Prosecutors eventually charged him only with mishandling nuclear data, and held him for nine months. In what amounted to a collapse of the government's case, prosecutors agreed to a plea bargain in which Lee pleaded guilty to one of 59 counts. In 2004, the FBI wrongly arrested lawyer Brandon Mayfield after the Madrid terrorist bombings, due to a misidentified fingerprint. The Justice Department's internal watchdog faulted the bureau for sloppy work. Spanish authorities had doubted the validity of the fingerprint match, but the U.S. government initiated a lengthy investigation, eventually settling with Mayfield for $2 million.

More unanswered questions the FBI case still has no answers for!

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080805/D92C8CIO0.html

Quote:

In the week since the government's top suspect in the 2001 anthrax attacks committed suicide, a sometimes bizarre portrait of 62-year-old Army scientist Bruce Ivins has emerged. But while Ivins had access to the deadly toxin and his therapist's portrayal of him is haunting, there are a number of unanswered questions in the FBI's case against Ivins. Some may be answered when the Justice Department unseals key documents detailing its evidence against Ivins. Others will remain unanswered, adding more uncertainty to an already mysterious case. Below are some of the biggest unanswered questions in the "Amerithrax" case and the possible answers that have emerged so far. Q: How could Ivins get access to powdered anthrax, since the biological warfare lab at Ft. Detrick did not deal with the toxin in that form? A: There is no indication that authorities can prove Ivins made the powdered form of bacteria. Investigators say that in 2001, Ivins borrowed a device, known as a lyopholizer, capable of converting anthrax spores into powder. But some colleagues say it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for Ivins to do that unnoticed. Q: How can the FBI link Ivins to the anthrax for certain? A: The FBI used advanced DNA testing to track the anthrax that killed five people to a sample Ivins controlled, but as many as 12 others had access to it. It's unclear for now exactly how the FBI eliminated those others as suspects. Q: What motive would Ivins have had to unleash an attack? A: One investigative theory is that Ivins released the toxin as a way to test cures he was developing or a vaccine he had recently patented. But it's unclear whether the FBI can prove that. Ivins' therapist said the scientist had a history of homicidal and sociopath tendencies, but his friends say his mental deterioration was caused by the FBI's relentless pursuit. Q: Did Ivins travel to Princeton, N.J., where the anthrax letters are believed to have been mailed? A: Authorities cannot place Ivins in Princeton when the letters were mailed. And the only explanation for why he'd make the seven-hour round trip is bizarre. Authorities say Ivins was obsessed with the sorority Kappa Kappa Gamma, dating back to his own college days. The Princeton mailbox is not far from the school's sorority office and authorities say Ivins had made unexpected visits to the sorority at other schools. Q: Why target media organizations and politicians? A: The FBI's initial behavior analysis said it's unlikely that NBC News, the New York Post, then-Sen. Tom Daschle were selected randomly. Analysts said the targets "are probably very important to the offender" and may have been the focus of his contempt. There is no indication, for now at least, that Ivins demonstrated such feelings. Under the theory that Ivins was testing his cure, lawmakers and media might drum up attention for the importance of anthrax drugs, but it's unclear whether there's any evidence about that. Q: Has the FBI matched handwriting samples from the letters? A: FBI handwriting analysts described a distinct writing style on the envelopes and letters sent along with the anthrax. The letters were all capitalized and block-style. The names and addresses tilted downward from left to right. The word "cannot" was written as "can not." The numeral one was written quite formally. The writer selected dashes instead of slashes in the date "09-11-01." The FBI has seized numerous documents in the case but it's unclear whether the handwriting has been matched.

Guess we will learn more when the evidence is presented, or not??

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

They being the FBI. And whether or not they are required to tell the truth is irrelevant. He believed it...because he knew it was true. And you do realize they left him on the street until they had enough to charge him. By the way, the DNA must exist because prosecutors won't file charges without evidence.

Quote:

He shared an office. Yes as a matter of fact I have worked in High Security Top Secret government areas and numerous people with the proper clearances are allowed in many different areas. Yes it is completely relevant where else traces of this powder was found. Janitors are also allowed in these areas. A contaminated rag could have been the cause for it being found where it was too, since it has been found in several undisclosed locations! Right, it shouldn't have been found there, or the several other areas it was found, around and near his shared office.

No, numerous people are not allowed in people's office or in labs in high security clearance. That is true about janitors though they tend to be federal employees and operate under supervision. A rag? Yeah a highly trained and experienced scientist used a rag to clean up some anthrax and then just threw it on a shelf in his office. You can't be serious.

Quote:

They have known since 2002 the source of the anthrax was the lab, he and several others had access too. As a side note; They are also now saying that he only had access to liquid anthrax, not the powder. So who is telling the truth here? Probably one of the reasons he was used by the FBI to help investigate the case. By the way, you do not dictate what is or isn’t relevant!

If I determine it to be irrelevant I will say it. Like I did previously. And you mean the story that was allegedly changed?

Quote:

He wasn’t the only person with access? Why do you keep ignoring that fact? If he was the only person with access he would have been arrested in 2002 when they found the contamination in his room. DUH??

Because they couldn't determine it was the same anthrax until now. Adn the same people with access to the lab had access to his office? Prove it.

Quote:

Since there are so many unanswered questions there are obviously several conclusions that could be viable assessments of the facts in there entirety. Your assumptions are based on ignoring relevant facts and concluding that since there is nothing more (other than all the other facts that you choose to ignore) then there can only be one conclusion. Jump to conclusions often Gilligan.

I have no assumptions, I am going by what I read. The assumptions are on your part. You're going from some minor questions = the government did it. LOL, talk about jumping to conclusions. Sounds like the 9/11 crowd.

Quote:

The number one reason for suicide in this country is depression, and/or drug usage.

Yep and people are killing themselves by the droves due to retirement.

Quote:

The highest suicide rate is also among men over the age of 85, who are depressed and feel useless, and have a belief it would be better for everyone around them if they were just dead. These are the same problems this guy has had for a while. He has also discussed with others his intent to kill himself, which is one of the significant signals that someone is unstable, ergo suicidal by definition. On the other hand the majority of people charged with crimes do not kill themselves even though, some do. Even in those cases it isn’t the guilt that does it, it is the helplessness of the situation. So I am not saying he didn’t commit suicide because he might have been guilty, but he was already on the road to suicide long before he was supposedly informed he was going to be charged.

The highest suicide rate in that age group is for men who are old and in physical pain. Retirement plays a very very small part. And no the majority of those charged do not kill themselves, but the majority of those who do kill themselves are as close to 100% guilty as you can get. That's because the innocent fight charges that are untrue. http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/menshealt...ionsuicide.htm
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...3/ai_n18616193

Quote:

Which is something curious in itself. They have a person who clinically depressed, on medication, has informed people around him and his doctor that he was suicidal, and has just been released from the hospital for observation from being mentally unstable, and the law contacts him to tell them they are on their way to take him away? Why in the world would they do such a thing? Talk about irresponsible behavior? They may have even contributed to his death by making the call rather than just going and getting the lunatic off the street, since they have "all" this evidence against that raises the suspicions that he is not only a threat to society but himself in general.

It's not their job to check with neighbors that he was suicidal. Another assumption of yours, that they knew.

Quote:

You wouldn’t, but you are the one that keeps trying to turn this into a conspiracy, not me.

Actually that would be you, the one assuming the massive government coverup (conspiracy).

http://www.examiner.com/a-1524165~Do...d_anthrax.html

http://www.examiner.com/a-1524271~Do...d_anthrax.html

And the humdinger But he's innocent!

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

DNA is one of the important and basic unit of our body.
threw that every body has to be identify indevidual.
in crime cases the DNA is one of the major pass.
and all the problebms and bdouts are solvable using any part of our body.
from the part of the body the DNA fining out and all the procedure are going on to the ckear the cases.



Lwyr

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.