Anthrax suspect dies in apparent suicide

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Anthrax suspect dies in apparent suicide

Postby Jeff » Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:56 am

Anthrax suspect dies in apparent suicide

The Justice Department was preparing to file criminal charges against Bruce E. Ivins in the anthrax mailing assaults of 2001 that killed five.


By David Willman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

9:42 PM PDT, July 31, 2008

One of the nation's top biodefense researchers has died in Maryland from an apparent suicide, just as the Justice Department was to file criminal charges against him in the anthrax mailing assaults of 2001 that killed five, the Los Angeles Times has learned.

Bruce E. Ivins, 62, who for the past 18 years worked at the government's elite biodefense research laboratories at Fort Detrick, Md., had been informed of the impending prosecution, people familiar with Ivins, his suspicious death and with the FBI investigation said.

Ivins' name had not been disclosed publicly as a suspect in the case that disrupted mail service and Senate business three weeks after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The Maryland scientist had for years played a pivotal role in research to improve anthrax vaccines, preparing anthrax formulations used in experiments on animals.

Regarded as a skilled microbiologist, Ivins also had helped the FBI analyze the powdery material recovered from one of the anthrax-tainted envelopes sent to a U.S. senator's office in Washington, D.C.

Ivins died Tuesday at Frederick Memorial Hospital after having ingested a massive dose of prescription Tylenol mixed with codeine, said a friend and colleague who declined to be identified out of concern, he said, that he would be harassed by the FBI.

The death -- without any mention of suicide -- was announced to Ivins' colleagues at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, or USAMRIID, through a staffwide e-mail.

"People here are pretty shook up about it," said Caree Vander Linden, a spokewoman for USAMRIID, who said that she was not at liberty to discuss details surrounding the death.

The extraordinary turn of events followed the government's payment in June of a settlement valued at $5.82 million to a former government scientist, Steven J. Hatfill, who was long targeted as the FBI's chief suspect despite a lack of any evidence that he had ever possessed anthrax.

The payout to Hatfill, a highly unusual development that all but exonerated him of committing the anthrax mailings, was an essential step to clear the way for prosecuting Ivins, according to lawyers familiar with the matter.

Federal investigators moved away from Hatfill -- for years the only publicly identified "person of interest" -- and ultimately concluded that Ivins was the culprit after FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III changed leadership of the investigation in late 2006.

The FBI's new top investigators -- Vincent B. Lisi and Edward W. Montooth -- instructed agents to re-examine leads or potential suspects that may have received insufficient attention. Moreover, significant progress was made in analyzing properties of the anthrax powder recovered from separate letters that were addressed to two U.S. senators.

The renewed efforts led the FBI back to USAMRIID, where agents had first questioned scientists in December 2001, a few weeks after the fatal mailings.

By spring of this year, FBI agents were still contacting present and former colleagues of Ivins. At USAMRIID and elsewhere, scientists acquainted with Ivins were asked to sign confidentiality agreements in order to prevent leaks of new investigative details.

Soon after the government's settlement with Hatfill was announced June 27, Ivins began showing signs of serious strain. One of his longtime colleagues told the Times that Ivins, who was being treated for depression, indicated to a therapist that he was considering suicide. Soon thereafter, family members and local police officers escorted Ivins away from USAMRIID, where his access to sensitive areas was curtailed, the colleague said.

Ivins was committed to a facility in Frederick for treatment of his depression. On July 24, he was released from the facility, operated by Sheppard Pratt Health System. A telephone call that same day by the Times verified that Ivins's government voicemail was still functioning.

The scientist faced forced retirement, planned for September, said his longtime colleague, who described Ivins as emotionally fractured by the federal scrutiny.

"He didn't have any more money to spend on legal fees. He was much more emotionally labile, in terms of sensitivity to things, than most scientists. ... He was very thin skinned."

A spokeswoman for the FBI, Debra Weierman, said Thursday that the bureau would not comment regarding the death of Ivins. Last week, however, FBI Director Mueller told CNN that, "in some sense, there have been breakthroughs" in the case.

"I'll tell you we made great progress in the investigation," Mueller added. "And it's in no way dormant."

Ivins, the son of a Princeton-educated pharmacist, was born and raised in Lebanon, Ohio, and received undergraduate and graduate degrees, including a Ph.D. in microbiology, from the University of Cincinnati.

The eldest of his two brothers, Thomas Ivins, said that he was not surprised by the events that have unfolded.

"He buckled under the pressure from the federal government," Thomas Ivins said, adding that FBI agents came to Ohio last year to question him about his brother.

"I was questioned by the feds, and I sung like a canary," Thomas Ivins said, referring to his efforts to describe his brother's personality and tendencies. "He had in his mind that he was omnipotent."

Ivins's widow declined to be interviewed when reached Thursday at her home in Frederick. The couple raised twins, who are now 24 years old.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... ?track=rss
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Nordic » Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:48 am

This reads like something out of a bad thriller.

My first thought upon reading this is: "you have got to be fucking kidding me".

I like how absolutely no motive is mentioned.

It's just "yeah, we've got the guy and gosh, now he's dead!"

Funny how dead men tell no tales.

I'm just in shock. Is this for REAL?

Do they really think we're that STUPID?
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Postby vigilant » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:22 am

Nordic wrote:
I like how absolutely no motive is mentioned.

When I read it I thought they gave us motive right off the bat when they threw this out there in the second sentence.

Bruce E. Ivins, 62, who for the past 18 years worked at the government's elite biodefense research laboratories at Fort Detrick, Md., had been informed of the impending prosecution, people familiar with Ivins, his suspicious death and with the FBI investigation said.

It appears that the pitch of the article is that his stress of being under suspicion, or having potentially been guilty was enough to cause him to commit suicide.

Actually it appears as if the the article was fashioned in a manner that "rushes" to make this statement. I think the article either "does" paint the appearance of a guilty man killing himself before he is discovered, or the article "attempts" to falsely plant that scenario into the mind of the reader. Whichever it may be...
The whole world is a stage...will somebody turn the lights on please?....I have to go bang my head against the wall for a while and assimilate....
vigilant
 
Posts: 2210
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Back stage...
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Nordic » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am

oh good god I wasn't talking about his motive for suicide.

I was talking about his motive to send anthrax through the mail and kill people.

They sorta don't mention that.

And I certainly don't believe his suicide was for real. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are?

Here's what I think it's a classic case of:

Image
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Postby compared2what? » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:37 am

vigilant wrote:Nordic wrote:
I like how absolutely no motive is mentioned.

When I read it I thought they gave us motive right off the bat when they threw this out there in the second sentence.

Bruce E. Ivins, 62, who for the past 18 years worked at the government's elite biodefense research laboratories at Fort Detrick, Md., had been informed of the impending prosecution, people familiar with Ivins, his suspicious death and with the FBI investigation said.

It appears that the pitch of the article is that his stress of being under suspicion, or having potentially been guilty was enough to cause him to commit suicide.

Actually it appears as if the the article was fashioned in a manner that "rushes" to make this statement. I think the article either "does" paint the appearance of a guilty man killing himself before he is discovered, or the article "attempts" to falsely plant that scenario into the mind of the reader. Whichever it may be...


I agree that they clearly intended to convey that he killed himself because of the (alleged) impending indictment.

I also say: WTF? He's a top biodefense researcher, and Tylenol with codeine was his poison of choice?

Unless he was a really bad scientist or he had a whole fuck of a lot of Tylenol with codeine, I'd say he must have been aware that's not usually the quickest or most certain way to go.

Wasn't there some cryptic exchange on the subject of the anthrax attacks between Mukasey and Patrick Leahy not long ago? I'm going to go look for it.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Nordic » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:41 am

I also say: WTF? He's a top biodefense researcher, and Tylenol with codeine was his poison of choice?


Oh man, you cracked me the hell up with that one!

Yeah, no shit!

Man, still chuckling over that .....

Obviously whoever killed him didn't want to expose him/herself to the really nasty stuff .....

Tylenol with codeine! LOL!
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Postby timetunneler » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:43 am

A lot of weird news coming out of (or centered around) the Maryland/Virginia area since June or so... more so over the past few days:

06/06 - Wonder Woman Lynda Carter Finds Dead Body in Potomac
http://bittenandbound.com/2008/06/06/wo ... n-potomac/

06/09 - Serial Rapist Suspected in Adelphi Attacks (Prince George County)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02391.html

07/17 - Maryland State Police Infiltrated Groups Opposed to War and the Death Penalty
http://www.progressive.org/mag/mc071708.html

07/28 - Serial Rape Suspect's Trail Of Clues Leads to Violent End (Adelphi rapist killed by police after claiming they were watching him)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 50_pf.html

07/29 - an aide to Senator Jim Webb found dead:
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/v ... hp?t=19545

07/30 - There's Something About Mary: Unmasking a Gun Lobby Mole
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature ... a-spy.html

07/31 - Police Raid Berwyn Heights Mayor's Home, Kill His 2 Dogs
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/v ... hp?t=19582

07/31 - U.S. anthrax suspect commits suicide: report
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/U.S._anth ... _0801.html

07/31 - Maryland Governor Orders Investigation of Spying by State Troopers
http://www.progressive.org/mag/mr073108a.html

Not necessarily connected obviously.. but possibly an indicator of things bubbling beneath the surface. There have been a lot weird stories of all types lately... UFOs, Edgar Mitchell alien claim, melting ice caps, the bus beheading, crazy false flag stories about Cheney. I'd say something under the surface might be beginning to boil.
Last edited by timetunneler on Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:59 am, edited 5 times in total.
timetunneler
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 3:54 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby compared2what? » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:43 am

Sorry, Nordic, didn't see your second post. You're right. And very sharp-eyed. You would think it called for an explanation, wouldn't you? Or you once would have, anyway. Here's the Leahy/Mukasey exchange, courtesy of JackRiddler:

JackRiddler wrote:Last few minutes, about 2 hrs 34 minutes into video at
rtsp://video1.c-span.org/15days/e070908_mukasey.rm

Transcript & commentary from
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/ ... terrorist/

emptywheel of firedoglake wrote:
Yeah, What ABOUT that Anthrax Terrorist?
By: emptywheel Thursday July 10, 2008 5:47 am
6


Call me crazy. But after viewing this very creepy exchange between Patrick Leahy and Michael Mukasey regarding the anthrax killer, I got the feeling that both of them know exactly who sent those anthrax-laden letters almost seven years ago.

Leahy uses the recent settlement between Hatfill and DOJ to raise the issue. As he raises it, he notes that he is privy to classified information about the anthrax killer, and because of that he has refrained from even discussing the case.


Leahy: I almost hate to get into the case of Steven Hatfill. I've refrained from discussing this, I've refused to discuss it with the press. I've told them some aspects of it I was aware of were classified so of course I could not discuss it but also, considering the fact that my life was threatened by an anthrax letter, two people died who touched a letter addressed to me I was supposed to open, I'm somewhat concerned.

What happened?

Mukasey: That case ...

Then Leahy makes s curious statement: we're paying Hatfill, which means that the guy who committed the crime is going free.


Leahy: We're paying Hatfill millions of dollars, the indication being the guy who committed the crime went free.

I'll let you sort through the logic of that sentence. But know that Mukasey doesn't like it--not at all.


Mukasey: Well, um, I don't understand, quote, the guy who committed the crime, unquote, to have gone free. What I do understand is...

Leahy: Nobody's been convicted.

Mukasey: Not yet.

Leahy: And five people are dead.

Mukasey: Yes, um...

Leahy: And hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent.

Eventually, it seems that Muaksey concedes that he, too, has very specific knowledge about the case.

Mukasey: That case is under active investigation and I need to be very careful about what I say.

Which Leahy seems to confirm. After all, if they didn't have very specific things to say to each other about the pursuit of the anthrax terrorist, then what good would a "private talk" about this be?

Leahy: We won't go any further. As I say, I feel somewhat reluctant because I was one of the targets. But I gotta say, what families of the people who died went through, what families of the people who were crippled went throug, even what my family went through. A lot of people are concerned and I won't say more because we are in open session but I think you and I probably should have a private talk about this sometime.

Mukasey: That's fine.

Leahy ends with a comment that may well be directed at Mukasey's unwillingness to prosecute Bush officials for torture, or may well be directed toward fraudsters who tamper with elections, or may well be directed at the contractors who are seemingly immune from prosecution in Iraq, or may well be directed at Turdblossom's involvement in the persecution of Don Siegelman.

Leahy: You're the one person, the one person, who has the final say the laws are going to apply to everybody in this nation.

But I can't help but wonder whether Leahy suspects the government doesn't think the laws against terrorism ought to apply to "guy who committed" the anthrax attacks.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Penguin » Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:32 am

Interesting.
Classic, should I say.
Penguin
 
Posts: 5089
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jeff » Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:02 am

From 2004:

Anthrax slip-ups raise fears about planned biolabs

By Dan Vergano and Steve Sternberg, USA TODAY

Bruce Ivins was troubled by the dust, dirt and clutter on his officemate's desk, and not just because it looked messy. He suspected the dust was laced with anthrax.

And he was in a position to know. Ivins, a biodefense expert, and his officemate were deeply involved in Operation Noble Eagle — the government's response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that killed almost 3,000 Americans and the anthrax attacks that killed five more less than a month later.

It was December 2001. Ivins, an authority on anthrax, was one of the handful of researchers at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, Md., who prepared spores of the deadly bacteria to test anthrax vaccines in animals. He knew enough to grow alarmed when his officemate complained, as she had frequently of late, about sloppy handling of samples coming into the lab that could be tainted with anthrax.

"I swabbed approximately 20 areas of (her) desk, including the telephone computer and desktop," Ivins later reported to Army investigators. Half of the samples, he found, "were suspicious for anthrax," betraying the clumpy brown appearance of anthrax colonies under a microscope.

Rather than reporting contamination to his superiors, Ivins said, he disinfected the desk. "I had no desire to cry wolf," he later told an Army investigator.

Months later, Army investigators would see Ivins' desk cleanup as the first sign of an alarming anthrax contamination at the nation's most renowned biodefense laboratory. A 361-page U.S. Army report on the events of that winter and the following spring, recently obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, opens a rare window into the government's guarded biodefense establishment.

...

It was during that period, as the anthrax investigation gained momentum, that Ivins' officemate "repeatedly expressed concern to (Ivins) that she may have been exposed to anthrax spores when handling powder," according to the Army's report.

The leak inside the BL-3 lab was found on April 8. Over the next two weeks, Ivins and other researchers tested lab surfaces to confirm the extent of the contamination. Eighteen lab workers were tested for anthrax exposure. Nasal swabs from one of them tested positive for anthrax. Army officials acknowledged the incident in an April 19 press release.

Anthrax was found in three places outside the containment lab. Colonies of two anthrax strains were found in the "clean change room" where male scientists disrobe before showering and donning sterile suits to enter the secure lab suite. The strains were Sterne, a benign form used in inoculations, and Vollum 1B, once Fort Detrick's signature bioweapons strain. Vollum 1B was grown from the blood of lab microbiologist William Boyle, who died after inhaling anthrax in a 1951 lab accident, hence the B in the name.

Further away from the lab suite, researchers found three strains of anthrax in the office called B-19 that Ivins and his colleague shared: Sterne, Vollum 1B and Ames. Ames is now the preferred strain for biodefense research and was the strain found in the Daschle letter.

Their tests also found more than 200 colonies of Ames strain on the lab's "passbox." The passbox is a 2-foot-square ultraviolet-bathed portal — a blue glow emanating around the edges of its door — used for safely passing potentially contaminated material into and out of the laboratory suite.

...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/200 ... labs_x.htm
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby RocketMan » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:18 am

I think Glenn Greenwald is doing a bang-up job of injecting some refreshing outrage and in this article even DEEP-POLITICAL insight into mainstream discussion:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/ ... 1/anthrax/

During the last week of October, 2001, ABC News, led by Brian Ross, continuously trumpeted the claim as their top news story that government tests conducted on the anthrax -- tests conducted at Ft. Detrick -- revealed that the anthrax sent to Daschele contained the chemical additive known as bentonite. ABC News, including Peter Jennings, repeatedly claimed that the presence of bentonite in the anthrax was compelling evidence that Iraq was responsible for the attacks, since -- as ABC variously claimed -- bentonite "is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program" and "only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite to produce biological weapons."

ABC News' claim -- which they said came at first from "three well-placed but separate sources," followed by "four well-placed and separate sources" -- was completely false from the beginning. There never was any bentonite detected in the anthrax (a fact ABC News acknowledged for the first time in 2007 only as a result of my badgering them about this issue). It's critical to note that it isn't the case that preliminary tests really did detect bentonite and then subsequent tests found there was none. No tests ever found or even suggested the presence bentonite. The claim was just concocted from the start. It just never happened.

That means that ABC News' "four well-placed and separate sources" fed them information that was completely false -- false information that created a very significant link in the public mind between the anthrax attacks and Saddam Hussein. And look where -- according to Brian Ross' report on October 28, 2001 -- these tests were conducted:

And despite continued White House denials, four well-placed and separate sources have told ABC News that initial tests on the anthrax by the US Army at Fort Detrick, Maryland, have detected trace amounts of the chemical additives bentonite and silica.
Two days earlier, Ross went on ABC News' World News Tonight with Peter Jennings and, as the lead story, breathlessly reported:
The discovery of bentonite came in an urgent series of tests conducted at Fort Detrick, Maryland, and elsewhere.
Clearly, Ross' allegedly four separate sources had to have some specific knowledge of the tests conducted and, if they were really "well-placed," one would presume that meant they had some connection to the laboratory where the tests were conducted -- Ft. Detrick. That means that the same Government lab where the anthrax attacks themselves came from was the same place where the false reports originated that blamed those attacks on Iraq.
-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:23 am

Irvins was Roman Catholic, so I think we should play Count the Catholics, since that's the game that would have occurred to some people on this board if he had been Jewish.

Seriously, I'm really curious what his political leanings were, since he (assuming he was guilty) targetted Dems.

Here's an interesting interview with Irvins brother. Sounds like there's something wrong with him:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/200 ... uspect.cnn
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:38 am

Clearly, Ross' allegedly four separate sources had to have some specific knowledge of the tests conducted and, if they were really "well-placed," one would presume that meant they had some connection to the laboratory where the tests were conducted -- Ft. Detrick. That means that the same Government lab where the anthrax attacks themselves came from was the same place where the false reports originated that blamed those attacks on Iraq.


Say, I don't have cable, so could those of you who do have it report to us how many times the media reports on the history of Cheney and Bush taking Cipro prior to the attacks?
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jeff » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:41 am

chiggerbit wrote:
Here's an interesting interview with Irvins brother. Sounds like there's something wrong with him:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/200 ... uspect.cnn


Whoa. :shock:

When I read him quoted in the original story as saying "I was questioned by the feds, and I sung like a canary," I thought there'd be an interesting story there, but not this interesting.

Old Tom has some issues, and not just with his brother, but he certainly had those as well. He makes a big deal of his own military experience (and the way in which he does implies it, or his "patriotism," was a point of contention with his brother), he doesn't claim any knowledge at all about the attacks or his brother's alleged part in them, but does say "He can go to hell as far as I'm concerned."

So why is Tom out front on this, as the only witness to his brother's character?
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby MinM » Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:16 am

Nordic wrote:oh good god I wasn't talking about his motive for suicide.

I was talking about his motive to send anthrax through the mail and kill people.

They sorta don't mention that.

And I certainly don't believe his suicide was for real. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are?

Here's what I think it's a classic case of:

Image

Right down to throwing his dead brother under the bus.
http://gawker.com/5031899/brother-of-de ... go-to-hell
Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3288
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 182 guests