Closing the Books on the Anthrax Case: Second Essay

Of interest to all of us, regardless of the match between the anthrax samples in the letters and the RMR-1029 at Fort Detrick, is what this says about the nature of biochemical research and progress in the last decade or so. It is, simply, exploding in a mind-boggling fashion. And, it is exploding by finding new evidence of specificity. That is, what was formerly simply seen as "anthrax" in general, is now divided into sub-species, with the possibillity of various genetic mutations having been discovered in the past decade. The completion of the "human genome project" about five years ago ushered in a new era of genetic research, but at this stage of the game it is as if we are living with all the world's phone books, with names entered at random, and we are trying to find one "smith" or one "lee" or one "singh" at a specific address. If human life is, in large measure, driven by hope, it is the hope that is given us by genetic researchers that is the basis of so much of our hope today. Yet it is precisely this research that gave investigators the confidence to identify the RMR-1029 stored at USAMRIID as the "guilty" strain.

Troubling Conduct

Once this is presented (and accepted), the details of Dr. Ivins' conduct just before the mailings of the letters becomes pretty troubling. In order to send out anthrax you just don't, apparently, take a slice of it and put it in envelopes. You have to create dry spores, which takes some time. I haven't yet read a convincing story about how long it would have taken someone like Ivins to take the original anthrax and then produce the dry spores which were swabbed onto the envelopes mailed in Sept. and Oct. 2001. Nor do I yet know how he used various pieces of equipment, such as lyophilizers, incubators and centrifuges, to do his work. It might be interesting to learn this. Here, though, is the troubling chronology, which has been established.

The first letters containing the deadly anthrax were mailed on Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2001. According to this article, Ivins was at building 1425 from 8:54 p.m on Friday, Sept. 14 until 12:22 a.m. Sept. 15, and stayed 2 hours and 15 minutes in Suite B3. Again, on Sept. 15 (Saturday), he returned to work at 8:05 p.m., staying until 11:59 p.m, spending another 2 hours and 15 minute in Suite B3. Finally, he came back on Sunday at 6:38 p.m. and stayed until 9:52 p.m., spending another 2 hours and 15 minutes in Suite B3. The mailings were sent out two days later.

But, apparently, the mailings, which contained the Ames strain of B. anthracis, were posted on Sept. 18 in a post office box in Princeton, NJ (five letters are believed to have been mailed; only two of which were actually accounted for, and both were postmarked "Trenton, NJ"). I have yet to see a convincing explanation of the Princeton connection, other than that he was seemingly obsessed with a certain sorority, and that the sorority had its house about 100 yards from the mailbox where the letters were originaly deposited. Sounds a little "Twilight-Zonish" to me, but it may be true.

The troubling pattern of late-night lab visits continued. Like the scientist in Bobby Pickett's "Monster Mash," he again was "working in the lab late one night," this time in October 2001. This two-letter mailing happened on Tuesday Oct. 9, also with a Trenton, NJ postmark. Ivins worked 10 hours and 15 minutes alone in Suite B3 late at night between Oct. 3 and Oct. 5. The letters from this batch went to the offices of Senators Daschle and Leahy. As to explanations of why it might have gone to these men, the only explanation given is that Ivins was a conservative, pro-life Catholic (though raised a Presbyterian) and both Daschle and Leahy were pro-choice Catholics. So, the logic would be that a pro-life person wants to kill pro-choice people. Sort of fuzzy to me, but then that is what the federal affidavit affirms about the mental state of Dr. Ivins.

Before getting to that point it should be mentioned that the second mailings contained a more potent strand, or species, of the Ames anthrax bacillus that consisted of a "highly refined dry powder consisting of about one gram of nearly pure spores."

Possible Motives

But law always asks about causation and motive, and so the motives for Dr. Ivins' having mailed these deadly missives were also front-and-center at the news conference. It is here that things also get a little fuzzy, because, as we have learned from the past 12 years or so, the FBI and federal prosecutors can paint almost anyone as a person oppressed in mind, about to "lose it," a desperate loser, who no doubt either has personal enemies or those who will criticize if the price or circumstances is right. He did send out a spate of troubling emails in Spring/Summer 2001, complaining about his "delusional thoughts" and, in one instance, spoke of himself as if in the third person, while confessing that he lived "both in the first and third person."

Yet, there may be something in the allegation that Ivins sent out tainted envelopes because he was disappointed in the progress of an anthrax vaccine on which he was working. I don't know all the details on this one, but it seemed as if he felt under increasing strain in the summer of 2001 because the research wasn't panning out as hoped. Then, in this theory, the anthrax letters would revive public interest for an anthrax vaccination. But what I don't know is whether the anthrax vaccine research wasn't going too well because of technical/scientific issues or because public opinion wasn't yet "there" (i.e., wasn't ready to be interested in anthrax vaccines).

Finally, there is the allegation made by federal officials that Ivins stalled the progress of the FBI investigation for at least two years by giving improper samples of the RMR-1029 anthrax when asked for it. The purpose, of course, would be to get the investigators "off the scent." Finally, the FBI discoverd the problem in 2004 and confronted Ivins in 2005. Then, it seems, he became a suspect in the case. But a lingering doubt persists--why wasn't his security clearance and his ability to work with this anthrax not revoked until 2007, if the strong suspicion arose in 2005 that he might have been playing "fast and loose" with investigators? Thus, this investigation, as almost all the recent FBI investigations demonstrate, shows that there is at least as much interest in understanding their investigation as the subject of their investigation.

Conclusion

It may be, indeed, that Dr. Bruce Ivins was solely responsible for the mailing of the anthrax-laced letters in Sept. and Oct. 2001. It could have been that the terror incident just one week before the mailing provided the necessary "cover" or stimulus for him to spring into action. Just as Arab terrorists were first suspected in the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, until we settled on a white guy, so the thought might have been that America, caught up in an immediate anti-Muslim, anti-Arab sentiment, would have perceived the anthrax letters as coming out of that same terrorist context.

Still, the investigation took too long, and it significantly damaged the career of Steven Hatfill, whom the government has just paid almost $6 in settling his case against them--for leaking negative, and untrue, information about him to the media. It makes us wonder whether the notion of "clean" investigations is a thing of the past (or whether it ever really existed). But I am hesitant for a moment to jump into the bandwagon, or juggernaut, in this case. I, like the author of Proverbs, want to hear what the other side says.

3689