The panel said the science did not support the Justice Department's
statement in a 2010 report that "the anthrax mailer must have possessed
significant technical skill," an assertion that narrowed who could have
been responsible. "Given uncertainty about the methods used for
preparation of the spore material, the committee could reach no
significant conclusions regarding the skill set of the perpetrator," the
report states.
By Jerry Markon
Washington Post
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
A panel of prominent scientists is casting new doubt on
scientific evidence that was a key part of the FBI's case against Bruce E.
Ivins, the deceased Army scientist accused of carrying out the deadly 2001
anthrax attacks.
The National Research Council, in a report issued
Tuesday, questioned the link between a flask of anthrax bacteria in Ivins's lab
at Fort Detrick, Md., and the anthrax-infested letters that killed five people
and sickened 17 others.
The Justice Department has said genetic testing
conclusively linked the letters to spores in the flask - labeled RMR-1029 -
found at the laboratory, where Ivins was a longtime researcher before
committing suicide in 2008. The government closed the case last year after
concluding that Ivins had single-handedly prepared and mailed the deadly
anthrax spores, an incident that terrorized a nation still reeling from the
Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
"The scientific link between the letter material and
flask number RMR-1029 is not as conclusive as stated in the DOJ Investigative
Summary,'' said the $1.1 million report by the council, which was commissioned
by the FBI. The document added, however, that the "genetic evidence is
consistent with and supports an association between the RMR-1029 flask.''
The report, while praising the FBI's energetic pursuit of
emerging science in the investigation, offered another possible explanation for
the apparent link between the letters and the Ivins flask and said it "was
not rigorously explored.''
The 190-page document by the research arm of the National
Academy of Sciences also said the FBI's scientific methods in collecting
samples of the strain of anthrax used in the attacks were "not optimal,''
and it said the authors could not verify the government's contention that only
Ivins and a select group of scientists possessed the required expertise to
prepare the spore-laden letters.
"This shows what we've been saying all along: that
it was all supposition based on conjecture based on guesswork, without any
proof whatsoever,'' said Paul Kemp, a lawyer who represented Ivins in
negotiations with federal prosecutors who were preparing to charge him before
his death. Kemp called for congressional hearings into the investigation.
The report makes no judgment about Ivins's guilt or
innocence, and federal law enforcement officials on Tuesday stood behind their
contention that Ivins was the anthrax killer. They pointed to what they said
was overwhelming evidence linking him to the attacks, including e-mails and
recorded conversations showing an increasingly agitated Ivins seeking to
implicate colleagues while misleading investigators about his ability to make
the deadly anthrax powder.
Lab records from Fort Detrick revealed that Ivins
uncharacteristically logged dozens of hours late at night just before the
anthrax envelopes were sent and that he was inexplicably absent during long
stretches when investigators think he drove to New Jersey to mail them.
"The FBI has long maintained that while science
played a significant role, it was the totality of the investigative process
that determined the outcome of the anthrax case,'' the FBI and Justice
Department said in a joint statement. "Although there have been great strides
in forensic science over the years, rarely does science alone solve an
investigation.''
The statement said the FBI had used science that was
"innovative and groundbreaking" and that the report "provides
valuable guidance" and "better prepares the FBI to respond to attacks
of a similar nature in the future. ''
But the long-anticipated report reignited a debate that
has been simmering among some scientists and others who have questioned the
strength of the FBI's evidence against Ivins.
The extensive eight-year FBI probe, which spanned six
continents, has included missteps, including the public naming of Ivins's
colleague Stephen Hatfill as a "person of interest" in the
investigation. The FBI later apologized to Hatfill.
"This report entirely undercuts the conclusion that
RMR-1029 was the source and that Ivins was the perpetrator,'' said Meryl Nass,
an anthrax expert and physician at Mount Desert Island Hospital in Maine.
"That evidence was totally critical to their case,'' said Nass, who added
that hundreds of people had access to the flaks in Ivins's lab. Federal
investigators have said they investigated and ruled out all possible other
suspects.
The report did endorse a key conclusion reached by FBI
scientists: that the anthrax spores used in the mailings had not been altered,
either genetically or chemically. That appeared to rule out the possibility
that the spores were "weaponized" or manipulated to make them more
deadly.
Some scientists have pointed to oddly elevated levels of
silicon in the spores as an indication that the deadly powder was enhanced by
someone with knowledge of advanced bioweapons techniques. The panel's findings,
however, appeared to support the theory that the spores were produced by one or
more individuals working alone, and were not the product of a state-run
bioweapons program.
The proximity of the anthrax attacks to Sept. 11 had also
fueled concern of possible terrorist involvement in the anthrax mailings. And
the report reveals that the FBI and intelligence officers collected samples
from an overseas site "because of information about efforts by al-Qaeda to
develop an anthrax program.''
The report said the tests turned out to be negative but
that the evidence was inconsistent, and it called for further review. It said
the committee that prepared the report was provided "only fragmentary
information" about the tests "very late in our study."
Federal law enforcement officials, speaking on condition
of anonymity to discuss sensitive information, said the committee was offered a
classified briefing to explain why federal investigators determined there was
no evidence of anthrax at the overseas site. The committee declined because it
only wanted information that could be made public, the officials said.
Staff reporter Joby Warrick and staff researcher Julie
Tate contributed to this story.
~~~~~~~~~
Panel Says U.S. Overstated Some Evidence Against Alleged Anthrax Mailer
Associated Press
HAGERSTOWN, Md.—Federal investigators overstated the
strength of the scientific evidence against a late Army researcher blamed for
the anthrax mailings that killed five people in 2001, a panel of scientists
said Tuesday after an 18-month review.
However, the panel didn't contradict the Federal Bureau
of Investigation's conclusion that the researcher was behind the letters.
The National Research Council committee scheduled a
briefing in Washington on its 170-page report, which examines the novel
microbial forensic techniques used by the FBI to determine that Bruce Ivins
acted alone in making and sending the powdered spores.
"We find the scientific evidence to be consistent
with their conclusions but not as definitive as stated," said Lehigh
University President Alice P. Gast, who chaired the 16-member panel.
The FBI said in a written statement that its conclusions
were based on a traditional investigation as well as scientific findings.
"The FBI has long maintained that while science played a significant role,
it was the totality of the investigative process that determined the outcome of
the anthrax case," the agency said.
Ms. Gast declined to comment on the guilt or innocence of
Mr. Ivins, who died of an apparently intentional Tylenol overdose in 2008 as
his indictment for the attacks neared. He had denied involvement, and his
lawyer and some colleagues have maintained he was an innocent man hounded to
self-destruction.
Early last year, the FBI formally closed its
investigation into the anthrax letters that unnerved a nation still reeling
from the 9/11 attacks, saying it had concluded that Mr. Ivins had planned and
executed the mailings by himself.
Five people died in October and November 2001 from
anthrax inhalation or exposure linked to the mailings. They were a Florida
photo editor, two postal workers in Washington, a hospital employee in New York
and a 94-year-old woman in Oxford, Conn. Seventeen others were sickened. Postal
facilities, U.S. Capitol buildings and private offices were shut for inspection
and cleaning by workers in hazardous-materials suits from Florida to New York
and elsewhere.
nvestigators have acknowledged that the case against Mr.
Ivins, who worked at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md., was circumstantial. Still,
Jeff Taylor, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said in 2008 that
prosecutors could prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Ivins was
responsible for the attacks. The FBI asked the congressionally chartered council
to validate its use of new and emerging science in the investigation.
The panel said the science didn't support the Justice
Department's statement in a 2010 report that "the anthrax mailer must have
possessed significant technical skill," an assertion that narrowed who
could have been responsible. "Given uncertainty about the methods used for
preparation of the spore material, the committee could reach no significant
conclusions regarding the skill set of the perpetrator," the report
states.
The report also challenges investigators' conclusion that
the parent material of the Ames anthrax spores used in the attacks came from a
flask labeled RMR-1029 that was created and solely maintained by Mr. Ivins.
"The scientific link between the letter material and flask number RMR-1029
is not as conclusive as stated" by the Justice Department, the report
says.
The report reveals that the FBI pursued a possible al
Qaeda link to the mailings by trying without success to grow anthrax from swabs
and swipes taken from an unspecified overseas site at which a terrorist group's
anthrax program was allegedly located. The samples tested positive for Ames
anthrax—false positives aren't unusual—but wouldn't grow spores, according to
sketchy information in a newly declassified document that the FBI gave the
committee in December or January.
The committee said the methods used in the inconclusive
tests should be explored in more detail.
Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights
Reserved