The matter regarding one time suspect, Dr. Steven J. Hatfill and his opposition to the BTWC and his efforts to sue every publication that reported the libelous information leaked to the media, John Ashcroft appeared to be the patsy here and subsequently could have contributed to his health and departure for the highly anticipated Alberto Gonzales.
Whether the 5.8 million dollar settlement was a payoff to Hatfill or an honest payment for the witchhunt, one thing is clear. The investigation was going nowhere until they had decided on Ivins. What was the urgency since this investigation was in progress for over six years?
It is interesting that there are cases of murder involving Diphenhydramine hydrochloride with the most recent being the case of US Army Captain Christopher Gray who is charged with killing his wife. Acetaminophen and Diphenhydramine hydrochloride can be administered in lethal dose intravenously as well. Considering that an autopsy was not done in this highly public and extremely serious investigation is ludicrous. Autopsies are ordered for homeless deaths that could involve suspicious crime scene evidence. There's no telling what other means could have been used, but there are other things to consider.
The investigation revealed Ivins had purchased the Tylenol that may have been responsible for his overdose, but there was no evidence or information regarding it being found in his stomach. Would there have been traces of gel caps or tablets in his stomach? Nor was there evidence of the bottles and drugs in his home.
On August 6, 2008, US Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor officially made a statement that Ivins was the "only person responsible" in the 2001 anthrax attacks. Ivins, attorney Paul Kemp stated that the discovery and evidence was not convincing and Ivins passed a polygraph regarding his involvement. His colleagues have argued that the technology was not available to Ivins to produce the sophisticated grade of Anthrax used in the attacks. Taylor said in his press conference stated that the "we regret that we will not have the opportunity to present the evidence to a jury to determine whether the evidence establishes Dr. Ivins guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."
If we were able to have the investigation tried by commission would we get the same results we got with Warren and 911? Might we find that the evidence was not convincing or so circumstantial, that they just presented this front in an effort to ratchet up Ivins in a mental state that would innevitably cause his demise?
Here are some interesting facts regarding US Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor.
* Jeffrey Taylor served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of California from 1995–1999
* From 1999 to 2002, Mr. Taylor served as majority counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee where he advised Chairman Orrin Hatch and drafted provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act.
* Before his appointment as U.S. Attorney, Mr. Taylor served as Counselor to Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales from 2002 to 2006. Attorney General John Ashcroft has appointed Jeff Taylor to be Counsel to the Attorney General for criminal and national security matters. Taylor replaces Dan Levin who is serving as the Chief of Staff for FBI Director Robert Mueller.
* He was appointed interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia by Alberto Gonzales on September 22, 2006 and was sworn in seven days later.
* Interim U.S. attorneys do not need to be confirmed by the Senate as a result of an amendment to the law governing interim attorneys included in the USA Patriot Reauthorization Act of 2005. He was the first interim Attorney to be placed under the new rules of the Patriot Act.
* On March 20, 2007, President Bush declared in a press conference that White House staff would not testify under oath on the matter if subpoenaed by Congress. One who ignores a Congressional subpoena can be held in contempt of Congress, but the D.C. U.S. Attorney must convene a grand jury to start the prosecution of this crime. Under 2 U.S.C. § 194, once either the House or the Senate issues a citation for contempt of Congress, it is referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, "whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action. No such action was taken.
How could this not be seen as a critical placement in light of the questions American have regarding the series of events that have unfolded since the attacks on the WTC and the subsequent inconsistencies regarding intelligence, investigations and accusations?
Of all the letters sent in the attack, here are the list of dead;
1. Robert Stevens, 63, a photo editor at The Sun