Indecent Exposure

Here we go again.

The press is running wild with the story of the apparent suicide of Bruce Ivins after he learned that the Justice Department was about to file criminal charges against him in the 2001 anthrax mailings. The Los Angeles Times broke the story on Thursday night. Yesterday and again today, newspapers are filled with all sorts of stories about the man who may or may not have been guilty of mailing the anthrax spores that killed several people. As to be expected, the Los Angeles Times has a story showing how Mr. Ivins would have benefited financially from all of the panic.

Bruce E. Ivins, the government biodefense scientist linked to the deadly anthrax mailings of 2001, stood to gain financially from massive federal spending in the fear-filled aftermath of those killings, the Los Angeles Times has learned.

Ivins is listed as a co-inventor on two patents for a genetically engineered anthrax vaccine, federal records show. Separately, Ivins also is listed as a co-inventor on an application to patent an additive for various biodefense vaccines.

The NY Times, not to be outdone by its West Coast competitor, has several articles on the story. One describes Mr. Ivins' psychological decline as it became clear that he was going to be charged. (I find that one too ghoulishly distasteful to quote from, but it is worth a look-see, which is why I have included the link.)

Ironically, the NY Times also has this story which is an historical summary of what happened to the last "Person Of Interest" in the anthrax case. Dr. Hatfill, hounded by the FBI and the press, sued everybody involved for the invasion of his privacy and the destruction of his career. All sorts of media outlets (including the NY Times) had to lawyer up to defend against these suits, some even settled with Hatfill rather than chance a trial. I guess the corporate media has a decidedly short memory, because they are now engaged in the same damnable behavior, only this time the subject is dead.

And here's the really sad part: we will never really know if Bruce Ivins was the perpetrator of the crime. While he might have been charged, there was no trial where he might have proved his innocence, which is something that is being lost in the rush to demonize him. His lawyer reminds us of that fact at the very end of the Los Angeles Times linked to above:

On Friday, Ivins' lawyer, Paul F. Kemp, defended his client and said that Ivins had cooperated fully with the FBI.

"We assert his innocence in these killings, and would have established that at trial," Kemp said, implicitly confirming that Ivins had been about to be formally charged. "The relentless pressure of accusation and innuendo takes its toll in different ways on different people. . . . In Dr. Ivins' case, it led to his untimely death."

Rest in peace, Mr. Ivins.