As the FBI’s Case Against Dr. Ivins Collapses, Jean Duley’s Melodramatic Story Fades As Well

by Scott Creighton

The New York Times is running an article about leading members of congress demanding more information from the FBI about the anthrax attacks and how they came to the conclusion that this was the work of Dr. Ivins. Apparently they don’t think the FBI has proven their case.

Some very interesting information has surfaced about the case, namely that the Department of Justice sent Dr. Ivins a letter in April of 2007 informing him that he was not the subject of the investigation. Also, as it turns out, the FBI waited till a week before his death to collect a sample of Dr. Ivins’ DNA for testing. As these and other serious problems with the FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins bubble to the surface of public attention, their lead witness, just a short month ago, seems to have vanished into thin air, never to be heard from again. What ever happened to Jean Duley and why aren’t the FBI investigators touting her claims as proof they got the right man?  Especially now that all of their other “evidence” is going down in flames?

In April 2007, after the mailed anthrax was genetically linked to Dr. Ivins’s laboratory and after he was questioned about late-night work in the laboratory before the letters were mailed, prosecutors sent Dr. Ivins a formal letter saying he was “not a target” of the investigation. And only a week before Dr. Ivins died did agents first take a mouth swab to collect a DNA sample, officials said.” NYT.

Now how is that possible? We have been told that the FBI began to focus on Dr. Ivins BECAUSE of the “new” DNA teststhat linked that specific strain of weaponized anthrax, RMR-1029, to Ivins. And yet, they only collected the DNA comparative sample a week before he died?  They had already been harassing him for months well before that. So what did lead them to him, if it wasn’t the DNA like they said? And why would they make up that story?

Another key question about the FBI’s conclusions drawn from that already suspect “new DNA evidence” is “who really had access to the RMR-1029 strain?”.

According to the NYT article, that specific strain may have been stored at Fort Detrick, but it was kept in a different building altogether at times, away from Dr. Ivins lab, which would increase the people that had access to it considerably.

Laboratory records obtained by The New York Times show that the anthrax supply labeled RMR-1029, which the F.B.I. linked to the attacks, was stored in 1997 not in Dr. Ivins’s laboratory, in Building 1425, but in the adjacent Building 1412. Former colleagues said that its storage in both buildings at different times from 1997 to 2001 might mean that the bureau’s estimate of 100 people with physical access to it was two or three times too low.” NYT.

 Yet, on Dec 16, 2001, The Washington Post came out with this information;

“”Dugway (US Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah) is the onlyfacility known in recent years to have processed anthrax spores into the powdery form that is most easily inhaled,” also stating, “Army officials in Washington said yesterday that Fort Detrick does not have the equipment for making dried anthrax spores.” Rock Creek Free Press.

You see, the question is, could the weaponized, silica-coated anthrax spores, have been produced in Dr. Ivins lab in the first place. Many scientists and apparently “Army officials” say no. The silica is added to the anthrax spores in order to keep them from adhering, or clumping, to one another. This provides for a much finer dispersal of the anthrax and a deeper inhalation of it by the victims. They found traces of silica in the envelopes sent to congress, leading investigators to believe it was from a highly processes weaponized strain.

However, the FBI has an answer for that as well;

Confusion remains about silicon found in the mailed powder. Some F.B.I. critics say it shows that there was a sophisticated additive that might point away from Fort Detrick as a source, but the bureau concluded that it was merely an accident of the way the anthrax was grown.”  NYT.

So, the FBI investigation is now reduced to saying it was dumb luck or an act of God that grew silica on the anthrax, in a highly controlled laboratory setting like the one at Fort Detrick?

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is so full of holes, that one has to be brain dead not to see through this.

Officials also acknowledged that they did not have a single, definitive piece of evidence indisputably proving that Dr. Ivins mailed the letters – no confession, no trace of his DNA on the letters, no security camera recording the mailings in Princeton, N.J.” NYT

 Not only that, but the handwriting does not match Dr. Ivins and he passed two separate polygraph tests during the “investigation”.

Ivins passed two polygraph tests and no link was made between his handwriting and that on the anthrax letters. Investigators were so frustrated at Ivins passing the polygraph tests that they searched his house for books or articles on how to fool a polygraph, but found none.

US Attorney Jeff Taylor stated that the investigators zeroed in on Ivins when they “conducted additional investigative steps,” and thus were “able to narrow the focus even further, exclude individuals, and that left us looking at Dr. Ivins.”

Those “additional investigative steps” were polygraph tests. Where passing a polygraph test was enough to exclude certain people, it did not exclude Ivins.

Ivins’ car, work locker, safe deposit box and house were thoroughly swabbed for anthrax spores multiple times over the space of years; not a single spore was found, although the killer anthrax was so highly weaponized that it behaved like a gas and was very difficult to contain.

None of the materials in the mailings were found at his house: not the tape, the envelopes, nor the pen used to write the letters. There isn’t one piece of evidence placing him in New Jersey at the time the letters were mailed: not a credit card receipt, restaurant receipt, nor a witness.” Rock Creek Free Press

And so, with NOTHING to go on, no rhyme or reason, the FBI focused it’s attention exclusively on Dr. Ivins to the exclusion of all others (the most significant of these would be the Dugway Proving Ground).

Just what WAS their strongest evidence?

The part of the story that got the country up in arms about the woman hating, potential spree-killer Dr. Ivins? Well, that would be Jean Duley of course; the final nail in Dr. Ivin’s coffin (sorry about that). And well, where is she now? Didn’t her husband promise she would be forth-coming with new revelations about Dr. Ivins before she took her sabbatical? Why isn’t the FBI parading her in from of congress to answer these difficult questions?

Is it because the last thing they want to do is put their patsy in front of a Congressional Investigation? That would be my guess.

Because according to her own version of what happened, she was in contact with the FBI long before she called the police and told them that Dr. Ivins promised to kill everyone in his office. Remember that story? Did any of the other members of that group session ever come out and talk about that? Did they ever confirm her statements?

And how exactly was it that the FBI told this woman that Dr. Ivins was going to be convicted of the anthrax attacks, when they clearly had no evidence at all; I mean none. Hell, at that point, they hadn’t even taken a sample of his DNA!So how did they tell her, according to her own statements, that Ivins was a killer, a “revenge killer”, when they had absolutely nothing to go on in the first place?

Has anybody asked how Jean Duley is doing now? She was fired from her job, so how is she making ends meet? Was she paid by the FBI for her “testimony” like Dr. Ivins son claims he was offered? Is there a reason the FBI hopes we forget all about Jean Duley?

Well, it’s time we opened a new case; the case against the FBI and how they handled the Dr. Ivins case. We need to get in touch with Jean Duley and find out just what exactly she was told by the FBI investigators that prompted her calling the cops on Dr. Ivins. Did she ever receive compensation for her assistance? These are key questions we need answers to in order to determine the final stages of this case. Because, in the end, with things wrapping up the way they did and with the frame-up of Ivins falling apart the way it is, the anthrax attacks may very well have claimed yet another life, some 7 years after the fact.

And again, it’s looking more and more like whoever attacked us with anthrax in late Sept. 2001, is on a government payroll of some kind.

Law enforcement officials somewhere need to haul Jean Duley in for serious questioning, and we need to (I hate to say it because his family has suffered way to much already) exhume the body of Dr. Ivins and run an independent autopsy (separate from the FBI and the Department of Justice) on his remains. Because it is starting to look like they might have killed this man to keep this flimsy case from going to trial or even to the Grand Jury.

One Response

  1. Where is Duley these days?

    Under FBI lock and key?

    It wouldn’t surprise me to read in the forthcoming weeks tha Duley “died” in an vehicle accident, caused by her being intoxicated.

    That would be a nice bookend to all of this BS about Ivins and the anthrax.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: