DNA Key To FBI's Anthrax Probe
It was science that led the FBI to the scientist.
Beginning with cell samples of the anthrax that was mailed in 2001, investigators used advanced DNA fingerprinting techniques to identify unique sections of genetic code. With that, investigators tracked the anthrax back to the biological weapons lab at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md., where the highly specific type of toxin was overseen by scientist Bruce Ivins.
A government scientist close to the investigation described the process to The Associated Press. He did so on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak about the case.
The genetic case-cracker and other tools used to identify Ivins as the lead suspect in the attacks are believed to be described in court documents that remain sealed. Because Ivins committed suicide last week before he could be indicted on murder charges, the Justice Department is considering closing the "Amerithrax" investigation, possibly as early as Monday or Tuesday.
If so, the court documents could be released, capping what had been one of the FBI's most publicized unsolved cases.
Quoting federal officials close to the seven-year investigation, The Wall Street Journal reports that a bookcase in Ivins' office at an Army laboratory contained anthrax spores that have become central to the probe and a key link to the government's case against Ivins.
Critics of the investigation told The Wall Street Journal that the spores found on the bookcase, along with those found in a nearby men's changing room - which are both far from the military lab where scientists worked with anthrax - should have made Ivins a top suspect much earlier.
Among the other unanswered questions in the investigation is how Ivins could have created the fine anthrax powder that, distributed in the mail, killed five people and terrorized the nation. Ivins' lab didn't deal with powdered anthrax and there is disagreement over whether he could have created it - and if he did, how he kept it a secret.
"It takes time and privacy, especially working out the methods, which I wouldn't have guessed anyone really knew in the lab at that time," said former colleague David R. Franz, who added that Ivins probably could have figured out the science but would have had trouble going unnoticed.
It's also unclear how prosecutors went from the DNA analysis, which narrowed their focus to a small number of scientists, to being certain enough of his guilt to prepare murder charges and begin discussing plea deals and the death penalty.
The case also raises public policy questions. Ivins' therapist, Jean C. Duley, described him as a "revenge killer" who had been diagnosed by several psychiatrists as "a sociopathic, homicidal killer." Yet Ivins was cleared by the U.S. government to work with some of the world's most dangerous toxins.
That underscores a little-known security gap in the nation's biological warfare laboratory system: Many of the estimated 14,000 scientists working with these dangerous substances are not screened for lingering psychological problems.
Dr. Russell Byrne, a former colleague of Ivins' who said he had known him for 15 years, said he had not noticed anything amiss in Ivins' behavior during the years they worked together. Byrne said the deterioration in Ivins' mental state had become noticeable to his colleagues only in the last year and could have resulted from the pressure of knowing he was under investigation.
"The changes really began to accelerate in the last year. He would sit at his desk weeping," Byrne said Monday on NBC's "Today" show. "He really couldn't do his work any more. The pressure was tremendous."
Only those scientists working at military labs are scrutinized for mental health and behavioral issues. And that heightened level of screening was apparently not enough to flag Ivins. One former colleague, Kathleen Carr, said it's largely up to scientists to self-report psychological problems that might make them dangerous.
"People given these kinds of responsibilities, with this kind of power at their fingertips, we have to make sure that they are not likely to do harm to others or misuse that authority - be it intentionally or be it because of some mental problem," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, a member of the House Armed Services Committee. "These kinds of situations cry out for reexamination of our standards."
Jonathan B. Tucker, a Washington expert on biological weapons, said stricter rules will come with a price.
"You're basically going to scare off any scientist from wanting to work in this field if it becomes even more stringent," he said. "It is a balance. It's a policy decision about how stringent we want to be."
CBS/ AP Beginning with cell samples of the anthrax that was mailed in 2001, investigators used advanced DNA fingerprinting techniques to identify unique sections of genetic code. With that, investigators tracked the anthrax back to the biological weapons lab at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md., where the highly specific type of toxin was overseen by scientist Bruce Ivins.
A government scientist close to the investigation described the process to The Associated Press. He did so on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak about the case.
The genetic case-cracker and other tools used to identify Ivins as the lead suspect in the attacks are believed to be described in court documents that remain sealed. Because Ivins committed suicide last week before he could be indicted on murder charges, the Justice Department is considering closing the "Amerithrax" investigation, possibly as early as Monday or Tuesday.
If so, the court documents could be released, capping what had been one of the FBI's most publicized unsolved cases.
Quoting federal officials close to the seven-year investigation, The Wall Street Journal reports that a bookcase in Ivins' office at an Army laboratory contained anthrax spores that have become central to the probe and a key link to the government's case against Ivins.
Critics of the investigation told The Wall Street Journal that the spores found on the bookcase, along with those found in a nearby men's changing room - which are both far from the military lab where scientists worked with anthrax - should have made Ivins a top suspect much earlier.
Among the other unanswered questions in the investigation is how Ivins could have created the fine anthrax powder that, distributed in the mail, killed five people and terrorized the nation. Ivins' lab didn't deal with powdered anthrax and there is disagreement over whether he could have created it - and if he did, how he kept it a secret.
"It takes time and privacy, especially working out the methods, which I wouldn't have guessed anyone really knew in the lab at that time," said former colleague David R. Franz, who added that Ivins probably could have figured out the science but would have had trouble going unnoticed.
It's also unclear how prosecutors went from the DNA analysis, which narrowed their focus to a small number of scientists, to being certain enough of his guilt to prepare murder charges and begin discussing plea deals and the death penalty.
The case also raises public policy questions. Ivins' therapist, Jean C. Duley, described him as a "revenge killer" who had been diagnosed by several psychiatrists as "a sociopathic, homicidal killer." Yet Ivins was cleared by the U.S. government to work with some of the world's most dangerous toxins.
That underscores a little-known security gap in the nation's biological warfare laboratory system: Many of the estimated 14,000 scientists working with these dangerous substances are not screened for lingering psychological problems.
Dr. Russell Byrne, a former colleague of Ivins' who said he had known him for 15 years, said he had not noticed anything amiss in Ivins' behavior during the years they worked together. Byrne said the deterioration in Ivins' mental state had become noticeable to his colleagues only in the last year and could have resulted from the pressure of knowing he was under investigation.
"The changes really began to accelerate in the last year. He would sit at his desk weeping," Byrne said Monday on NBC's "Today" show. "He really couldn't do his work any more. The pressure was tremendous."
Only those scientists working at military labs are scrutinized for mental health and behavioral issues. And that heightened level of screening was apparently not enough to flag Ivins. One former colleague, Kathleen Carr, said it's largely up to scientists to self-report psychological problems that might make them dangerous.
"People given these kinds of responsibilities, with this kind of power at their fingertips, we have to make sure that they are not likely to do harm to others or misuse that authority - be it intentionally or be it because of some mental problem," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, a member of the House Armed Services Committee. "These kinds of situations cry out for reexamination of our standards."
Jonathan B. Tucker, a Washington expert on biological weapons, said stricter rules will come with a price.
"You're basically going to scare off any scientist from wanting to work in this field if it becomes even more stringent," he said. "It is a balance. It's a policy decision about how stringent we want to be."
Popular on CBSNews.com
-
Photos: Underground shots of NYC's Second Ave. subway project New York City's Second Ave. subway was first conceived almost a century ago and when it is completed, it will extend all the way down the eastern side of Manhattan with 16 new stations. CBS News' Don Dahler reports on one of the most challenging public works projects in the country.
- Reporter Michael Hastings dies at 33
- Google asks FISA court to lift gag order on NSA requests
- Girl who lost feet in lawnmower gets prosthetics
- Tornado briefly touches down on Denver airport runways
- Scientists say shipwreck timber in Lake Michigan centuries old
- Taliban: We killed 4 U.S. troops at Afghan air base
- FAA approval sought for 650-foot-tall Vegas thrill ride
- Report: U.S. teacher training an "industry of mediocrity"
"While aides to Gerald Ford, Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Cheney helped cover up the background to the death of CIA scientist, Frank Olson who fell from a 10th floor window in 1953, not long after he had been classified as a potential security risk."
"Olson''s son Eric says his father''s conscience was troubled by awareness of Nazi-style CIA experiments on human subjects. "
" I don''t beleive anything the Government is saying about Bruce Ivins".
The most important statement of the NBC interview and
CBS does not report it.
The answer to the Anthrax mystery lies with Bush, Cheney and the CIA strategists who wanted to drum up support for the invasion and regime change of seven countries. Putting the American people in fear of terrorism for their dirty game on the world stage was a disgusting choice. Using a genetically fingerprinted US Army military grade Anthrax was not very smart. They never thought anyone would research the materials genetic fingerprint. Money, power, greed for gain, they all need to be indicted for crimes against humanity in the World Court where justice will be served for all.
Posted by notfooled at 03:49 PM : Aug 04, 2008
----------------
WHY did the FAA do NOTHING in response when one of the 9/11 pilots was turned in FIVE TIMES for being unfit to hold the commercial license he had in 2000?
WHY did Bill Clinton INTENTIONALLY weaken the FBI and the FAA by EXECTUIVE ORDERS that cleared the way for the 9/11 attacks?
Posted by bobnjersey at 02:15 PM : Aug 04, 2008
---------------
LOL! I dunno, why not ask downtowner97 what freedoms HE is referring to when he has posted THE SAME THING A DOZEN TIMES A DAY.
And you never question HIM about what freedoms. LOL!
Mr Irvin was a friendly upbeat man from most accounts up until the time he became stressed by the strain of the investigation.
He made the mistake of attending GROUP therapy to relieve the stress. (Always a bad move)
So far ONLY Jean Dudly is named as seeing a homicidal maniac. We don''t know about the reports of psychiatrists from many years ago. In between these times he was a good guy as observed by friends.
His behavior change could have been from a combination of stress AND drugs but we don''t know that officially yet. You''ve read about antidepressants, I hope.
The DNA was of the anthrax spores not of him. The news sometimes misses that point.
So where are the other folks in the Group therapy session and what did they hear?
What did Dudly do to be the focus of Irvin''s alleged revenge?
What drugs was he taking. if any?
Only circumstantial evidence is known to show any link between Irvin and the attack. That might be enough for an indictment but probably not a conviction. His lawyer probably had it under control.
Tell me more folks. The only thing I see is a guy stressed out with cause, and a shrink making waves.
This is not enough info to explain any of these events.
I''m happy that such a high percentage of the posters on here are calling BS on this story. The fact that CBS is still keeping this story alive, is that they don''t buy it either. That being said, they need to dig deeper and get more experts to speak out on how this guy couldn''t have done this.
From Oswald, to McVey, to Foster, to Ivins, we can''t let investigations die with one man. Murder is murder no matter who is in charge.
Posted by mtracy9 at 02:53 PM : Aug 04, 2008
20 minutes BEFORE building #7 at the world trade center fell, the BBC announced that bldg #7 had fallen down.
10 minutes BEFORE bldg #7 fell down, a New York Fire Captain warns his men, "Move away from #7, they%u2019re gonna blow the bldg."
http://911blogger.com/node/10025
for both of the above facts RECORDED LIVE.
Until you do %u2013 you don%u2019t know the truth.
-who were the people who hijacked the planes?
-who ordered the military to stand down on 9/11 because of so called war games?
-why are some of the alleged hijackers still alive?
-who mailed out the anthrax?
-why did the govt'''' try and convict an innocent person?
-why does the Justice Department refuse to charge bin laden with a crime connected to 9/11?
-why did bush have bi laden''''s family flown to saftey after 9/11, when all other flights were grounded?
-why did bush really invade Iraq?
-did bush really think there were wmds?
-if he did why did he try and deliberately fool the American people by having the Secratary of Defense call a weather balloon trailer a mobile weapons lab?
-why did the white house have network news run a story about the yellow cake from Iraq being sold to canada like this was evidence of saddam''''s wmd program when that yellow cake was handed over to inspectors by saddam long before the invasion?
-why did the bush administration refuse to allow the inspectors to finish their job, even when the iraqi''''s as well as the international inspection team said saddam was cooperating. remember saddam didn''''t kick them out, bush ordered them to leave?
-why hasn''''t bush or cheney been charged with leaking the name of a cia agent when thier is sufficient evidence to prove one or both of them did?
Posted by getoffmine at 01:32 PM : Aug 04, 2008
Dont believe a word the goverment says