Hounded To Death
Apparently, Bruce Ivins committed suicide after being under
scrutiny from the FBI for the anthrax killings. The implication is that only the guilty commit suicide. The conclusion is that the case is solved, because the FBI cannot prosecute a dead man.
This comes on the heels of a multi-million dollar lawsuit won by Steven Hatfill who not only was scrutinized by the FBI but flagrantly targeted as the anthrax killer.
Ivins was also under a restraining order from his therapist (how unsuccessful was she), because she thought he was homicidal. She thought he was going to kill his co-workers and so she got a restraining order. Am I the only one that doesn't see any link here? And she was the only one. His colleagues and friends thought he was kind of quiet. But of course that is seen as a typical personality trait of the killer. It is also the personality trait of a gentle man who wouldn't harm a flea. The therapist claimed that he was going to shoot or knife people. Just how homicidal could he be, if he takes his life with a bottle of Tylenol?
When you're dealing with a government entity, that can lie (as approved by the courts) and ignore contradictory evidence and scrutinize your every move from your entire history, you will lose. The only thing they will gather up is the "evidence" that supports their theory. I submit that these techniques could be applied to any one and the evidence would mount that the any one targeted was guilty.
Apparently the FBI have found evidence that links a flask in Ivins' laboratory to the anthrax used in the attacks. Is that a new science we haven't heard about or just another lie? I will buy the theory that they can link the DNA signature of the anthrax to the anthrax in his lab. I think the basic, forensic theory here is that you take something away and leave something behind with every crime. Since anthrax was not found on his flask, this means that the flask was linked to the anthrax. To spell it out, some flask molecule, glass molecule, matched up completely or near completely to the glass molecule in the anthrax delivered to its victims. That would be like saying you could determine which bowl was used to mix up a cake.
I've found that suicides are usually the victim of a miserable life. They see the future as hopeless and that they cannot make a change in the future that they perceive. Bruce Ivins saw the FBI closing in on him as a heinous criminal. The rest of his life would be spent trying to prove his innocence, which cannot be done. No one can prove a negative. He was hounded to death by our justice system. The killers in this story are the FBI. The victim is Bruce Ivins and justice.
We are no closer to finding the anthrax killer than if we had made a random selection from the phone book.
This comes on the heels of a multi-million dollar lawsuit won by Steven Hatfill who not only was scrutinized by the FBI but flagrantly targeted as the anthrax killer.
Ivins was also under a restraining order from his therapist (how unsuccessful was she), because she thought he was homicidal. She thought he was going to kill his co-workers and so she got a restraining order. Am I the only one that doesn't see any link here? And she was the only one. His colleagues and friends thought he was kind of quiet. But of course that is seen as a typical personality trait of the killer. It is also the personality trait of a gentle man who wouldn't harm a flea. The therapist claimed that he was going to shoot or knife people. Just how homicidal could he be, if he takes his life with a bottle of Tylenol?
When you're dealing with a government entity, that can lie (as approved by the courts) and ignore contradictory evidence and scrutinize your every move from your entire history, you will lose. The only thing they will gather up is the "evidence" that supports their theory. I submit that these techniques could be applied to any one and the evidence would mount that the any one targeted was guilty.
Apparently the FBI have found evidence that links a flask in Ivins' laboratory to the anthrax used in the attacks. Is that a new science we haven't heard about or just another lie? I will buy the theory that they can link the DNA signature of the anthrax to the anthrax in his lab. I think the basic, forensic theory here is that you take something away and leave something behind with every crime. Since anthrax was not found on his flask, this means that the flask was linked to the anthrax. To spell it out, some flask molecule, glass molecule, matched up completely or near completely to the glass molecule in the anthrax delivered to its victims. That would be like saying you could determine which bowl was used to mix up a cake.
I've found that suicides are usually the victim of a miserable life. They see the future as hopeless and that they cannot make a change in the future that they perceive. Bruce Ivins saw the FBI closing in on him as a heinous criminal. The rest of his life would be spent trying to prove his innocence, which cannot be done. No one can prove a negative. He was hounded to death by our justice system. The killers in this story are the FBI. The victim is Bruce Ivins and justice.
We are no closer to finding the anthrax killer than if we had made a random selection from the phone book.


Comments