Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Dispute Closing of the Bruce Ivins Anthrax Case

Posted by Soulskill on from the it-was-the-one-armed-bioterrorist dept.

Stirling Newberry writes "The New York Times reports that an upcoming paper by Martin E. Hugh-Jones, Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, and Stuart Jacobsen – all of whom have long questioned the closing of the Bruce Ivins anthrax case – points to the presence of tin in the spore samples as a sign that the samples mailed had been processed beyond what Ivins alone could have done. While not disputing that the spores came from Ft. Detrick, Hugh-Jones, who has co-authored several papers on anthrax signatures, contends according to the Times: 'it appears likely that Dr. Ivins could not have made the anthrax powder alone with the equipment he possessed, as the F.B.I. maintains. That would mean either that he got the powder from elsewhere or that he was not the perpetrator.' For a good summary of the case from a medical standpoint, this paper in the Annals of Internal Medicine is an excellent place to start. A review by the National Resources Council that stated the evidence available was not sufficient to locate the source of the spores is also available."

4 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. You do realize... by tkrotchko · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...that once the police "get their man", their effort is spent proving that he was the guy, not to look for things that disprove their theory, correct?

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    1. Re:You do realize... by 1s44c · · Score: 3, Interesting

      To some extent, police investigations fail scientific rigor. They come up with a hypothesis and try their hardest to find evidence to support it, rather than coming up with a hypothesis and trying to disprove it.

      The court system is meant to try and disprove it. In practise they are more interested in finding loopholes in law than proving or disproving facts.

    2. Re:You do realize... by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let's see: On the hand you've got a huge, government-funded agency with hundreds of people working with fancy equipment, etc. trying to prove a case.

      On the other you've got ... whatever the defendant can afford to pay.

      Are you surprised they go for loopholes rather than trying to prove their innocence via facts/evidence?

      --
      No sig today...
  2. The main issue with identifying felons in US by no-body · · Score: 3, Interesting

    seems to be success pressure in high profile cases. Showing results is paramount over doing it right and just.

    Troy Davis being one recent example and Bruce Ivins may have been another casualty to this pressure, seeing the injustice and facing the witch-hunt could have driven him to suicide which makes it easy to label him guilty: SUCCESS!

    Trust to US justice system and other institutions (FBI, CIA, Police) is reduced more and more.