J .. Q Q! 7..1 _ X . Y 5 Y ' SI _,..T_ ' ELL II~IF i J11!ILisJ I IEII-I r:|:|:~:"m:r~rEr1 ~ HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT P134023 91° 6'21'2°°7! l=EEIJIEliI92l. IJTEEPE E3llIIIEI92ll DI: IIl92!IEE51FI iIlJFl JII 51-IFJIJIJ unaEP.m1
Confidential HumanSource CHS!Reporting Document I
DATE: 12-IIIEJ-2E-DE? Reporting Date:08/24/2007 ¬l CLASSIFIED EFT ISU324 UC D}UIF: R EEASUBI: 1.4 E! Case ID:279A-WE-222936-BEIV Type of Contact: e~Mail Location: I I b6 Written by: PI| | b C Other s! Present:SAI I Source Reporting: b l can A copy of the email is enclosed in the 1A. O0 b7- C i SRT Cl V 1 IFECE:ELEaf:1E1IFIED 6022412-|:|51-2|:u:|:3 B? TJCBAT r P.F3fLE1C SE ALL Q I F'7 R"mTI3H_ -'3' T§*Im5D RE&5UH: llé£53 = HEREIE I5 UNCLAEEIFIEDEXCEPT DECLASEIFY um: 12-09-2032: "THERE 5= 'H'3'I-T -I ['THET~"'~'15E FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document 1 - Reporting Date: O8/14/2007 bz Case ID#: 279A WF 222936-BEI/ Contact Date: 4/O3/2007 bf C» Type of Contact: In Person b7c Location: I l Writer: PII I Witness es!: SA I bl Source Reporting: £5 | ~@1 Q9 I, 3' H Z W U J; 'w , ~92 x , 1 MFQM-uTInwIS UECLA5SIFIED rzcmilz-TED- FD 1°23 R°"-6'22'2°°7! 1' DATE l2 lIII E:II!II!I3BY @0324 UIZ EAIJ.. P.5; Li:1I3 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: O8/23/2007 Case ID:' ~ EI Pending /£'926L&b2 Contact Date: O4/19/2007 Type of Contact: e Mail Location: I i , be 137C Written by: SA 0ther s! Present: PI _ b7D Source Reporting: On O4/19/2007,[:::]forwardedto case agents[:::] email received by cns from JIMMYFLATHEA a.k.a. BRUCE IVINS IVINS's email states in part: "I want to x ress my honest sympathy to you . . I | Everything I've read about her says that she was an outstanding young woman. May her light shine forever in those b6 she touched during a life that was far too short." b7C fron1[::]is attached for reference. I» I____ G __ I I I I. t'>¬_ in P - , - 0 HERE ALL IN II UIIIE I&TI|II~ILASSIFIEI1 CUIJTLII-1'ED FD4023 Rvho424000 DATE 12-10-ZUEE B? 50324 UE aim P3eL5L FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: 08/22/2007 Case ID: EIv4Pending! ~05 I 122 Pending! b7D Contact Date: 08/20/2007 Type of Contact: e Mail Location:_ I I WrittenOther s! Present. by:SAI NTA I v Source Reporting On 08/20/2007,: 1: in response to inquiries from SA I I CHS explained that their contact with BRUQE IVINS 8. . kl . . JIMIIYFLATHEA I jimmyflathe [email protected]. Also on O8/20/2007, CHS DrovidedI I I b providedthe to substantivecase tile have beenappropriatelyCopies redacted to maintain the confidentiality of CHS. O6 QZ O V ' FD_] 3 Rev_6_22_10O7! '£§ ALQIFQRJHATIQIJIIE. Ia] IS TIFICLASSIFIEIII cnmrirrn DATE 12-1u~2uus at 50324 UE EAUfR3fL5E FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIDN ' Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: 09/05/2007 Case ID: Pending! b3 Pending!~_L* b7D Contact Date: O9/04/2007 Type of Contact: In person Location: I _ _ I b6 Written by: Special Agent| I b7C Other s! Present: Postal Inspectorl l / Source Reporting: CHS, who is in a position to testify, provided the following information: . There ha been no discernable change in the recent behavior of B UCE NS while he has been at the United Stategr, grmv Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases bg QUSAMRIIDQ. IVINS was 'na noticeably depressed state following b7C his most recent interact n with the Federal Bureau of b7D Investigation and subseque~t travels to Washington, D.C.; however since that period of time, IVINS has maintained an upbeat attitude while at work. Despite IVINS's upbeat attitude, Although IVINS had previously indicated he would retire, there has been no discernable activity on IVINS part to turn over or teac any of his current work I duties/resnonsibi itiesW I bit, ha 92 No othernctable informationwas attained. has beenhas been boisterousinIVINS's pertaining toand i office, mailingsmatters surroundin of2001,[%::::]has the in estigation discototherwise of the anthrax laced letter commented publicallyion the matter as of late. has% been very i CHS Reporting . 279A WF 222936~BEI Pending!, 09/04/2007 b6 bT"C b7h Recently and inventory was conducted of the same and it was noted that there was items on IVINS's shelf that indicated there were spores of the Ames strain of Bacillus anthracis contained therein. When queried, IVINS responded that he had irradiated those spores. When queried as to where the appropriate paperwork was which documented the irradiation, IVINS responded something to the effect, "was I suppose to do that?" CHS noted IVINS has a consistent pattern of not using the appropriate paperwork and would often irradiate materials as he deemed necessary or appropriate. CHS thought this behavior was peculiar as if IVINS thought of himself as being scrutinized pertaining to the anthraX laced letter mailings, then why would he not attempt to do things by the books? A review of available papers in a particular drawer adjacent to the sink in IVINS s B3 hot suite produced no items of investigative merit. This common drawer contained miscellaneous handwritten notes and papers produced by persons working in IVINS's B3 hot suite. 2 I -i _:. I ALL I 111-IATIUIE CCIIJTAII-IEI3 FD-302'10-5-95! DATE Rev Pmmlg 12-09-200% IEMELAEEIFIED BY 50324 uc BAHHRSELEE . -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION b6 b7C Date oftranscription 9 Z ]_O [ 2 O O'7 On September 5, 2007 [::] Frederick County Chapterof the Ameri an Red_Cross,. East ofPatrick Street,employment, Also Walkersville, Marylandpresentduring waijgerview interviewedthe at lace was A ter being advised of the identity of the interviewing Postal In pector andand[f%:::::]provided S ecial Agent, as well following as thethe nature of information: the interview, Both] |and| |confirmed that BRUCE* vms attendedfour a hourtraining classE7:ii?ii?jer 22,20 , titled "Introduction to Disaster Services." provided a omputer generated spread sheet which listed all of the various training courses and corresponding attendance dates which IVINS had been credited for completing while volunteering with the American Red Cross.E::::::::] explained that although the first entry on the printout indicates that IVINS completed the Disaster Services givencourse on was OctoberSeptember l, 2001, th 2001.E:iff ii:fadvised 22, ate in whichthat the the course date waslisted on the printout simply reflected the date the entry was put into the computer. To further corroborate IVINS s attendance of thi course on September 22,2001,[::::::::] provided the interviewin agents with copies of the Disaster Training Course attendance rosters. ' 2 [:::::]and[:::::::]reviewed the remainin 9 entries displayed on IVINS's RedCross Training Record and indicated that the remaining training courses listed appeared-to be accurate and ref actual dat the tr ' ' ' andtifiif:fETconfirmede ainingthe that only other courses training wereg1ven.[:;::;]course lC w IVINS attended in 2001 was called "Mass Care: An Overview." According to the printout IVINS attended this course on November 27, 200l.[:::::]and[:::::i::]advised that they currently couldnot locate any class rosters which would confirm IVINS's attendance at this course but would continue to search old records for the rosters. WFO NOTE: enclosed in the FD~340 associated with this communication is a photocopy of BRUCE IVINS's American Red Cross DSHR Member Profile Report which includes his Red Cross Training Investigation on O9/05/2007 at Walkersville , Maryland File# 279A WF 222936 BEI- 92Q'7, Date dictatedN/A by SA PI?L This documentcontains neitherrecommendations conclusionsnor ofthe FBI. It is the propertyof the FBI andis loanedto your agency; it and its contentsare not to be distributed outsideyour agency. - ;5,_;é/4,/Wf 6<'c>5S.4//0 <3 . 1. 7 .2 FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! Q 6 279A-WF 222936 BEI ha b7C Continuation of FD-302 |, of OnO 9 / 05 / 2 00 7 , Page _2_- record. Also enclosed in the FD 34O are eight photocopies of the Disaster Training class roster dated September 22, 2001.! |:|ANo|:| advised that back in 2001 their American Red Cross chapter held its monthly Emergency Services meetings on the third Monday of each month. They confirmed by reviewing records and a 2001 calendar that the third Monday in October of 2001 did in fact fall on October 15. They stated that n the meetings generally began at approximately 6:30pm and lasted t approximately one and a half to two hours in length. As in prior interviews] |and| |reiterated that IVINS typically attended these monthly meetings but they could not provide any documentation that could confirm whether or not IVINS did in fact attend the October 15, 2001, Emergency Services meeting. 0 I I _ i 4 » '' 9 V F'2, Q >P FD3°2 ¥ R *1 685! nnnrtn iii INF is UNPLA %IFIED "Tron c1nT"InEr A DATE lE Cl9 EiE92Di3 BY 51132-51 UE Bls.T.~L* P.5: L5E -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION " Date of transcription O 8Z O '7 [ 2O O '7 Kappa b6 _Kappa GammaGGKD FraEérnit Headquarters, East T6Ln Street b7 Columbus, Ohio] Y1 emailaddressfgv [L C Prior SSANIto meetin qH was interviewed Laqents had at] spoken Iplace ofwit i em loent. , who represents KKG. I w osure Agreement for who reviewed and signed the agreement prior to meeting with agents. After being advised of the identity of the in t erviewing agents and the nature of the interview,[:::::::::] provided the following information: KKG headquarters oversees all administrative aspects of .the organization. There is an elected council of national officers.| lis not an elected position, but an administrative position for the fraternity. Below headquarters, the administration of KKG is broken down into regions, and then into provinces within each region. The individual chapters fall within the various provinces. [;;:;E;:]explained that KKG headquarters maintains a database o a initiated members of the sorority as reported by the various chapters, including active collegiate members, alumnae, and deceased members. Not included are women who pledged the sorority but were not ultimately initiated. The database only goes back to 1991, and member information prior to that date is maintained by the individual chapters. The headquarters database is different from the database available to members on the internet in that the internet database does not include deceased members, and only includes information members have opted to include. KKG holds a national convention every two years, and every chapter sends at least one delegate, usually the chapter president. Headquarters records of past conventions include when the conventions were held and where. Headquarters also has a record of convention delegates, which information would also emaillikely be from1f7iiiEif:ff2Tattached ' individual a list ofchapters. all KKGIn a follow upconvention Investigation on O 8/ 0 7 / 2 O 0'7 at Columbus , Ohio File# 27 - - ~ >- Datedictated O8/O7/2007 SA by SA this document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the F ' erty of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; ' and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency. "'? /o 75.Zo;l- ' A , . O AL E!M-MTIUBTFJ]?-§ FAII1 ED C ED602a@&un1W6$5! 15 HE UNCLASSIFIED DATE 12-as-suns BY suazq u: BAUERSILSE 279A WF 222936 BEI b¬C b- cmmmmmonmamor _| i ,d1O8/O7/2007 ,Pge 2 / sites from 1964 to 2006. The attachment names only the locations of the conventions and does not list the delegates. [::::::::] did not recognizethe nameBB CEIVINS butwas familiar with IVINS's internet username JIMMYFLA HEAD. According to [::::::] as JIMMYFLATHEAD h previous ' y attem ted to buy KKGitems suchas memberbadges throuh eBa y. E::::fE] allowed interviewingagents toreview[:::?file onKKG items recently auctioned on eBay, however the file contained no referencesby interviewing to JIMMYFLATHEAD, agentsto have IVINS,been or used anyby other IVINS.if::f:f::] u rn m known noted_that within the last year, a cipher had been put up for auction, but a KKG member was able to buy the cipher. A cipher Ritual.is necessar [:fi:::]does for proper not interpretation knowwho of offered thethe KKG cipher Book forof auction, but does not recall that JIMMYFLATHEAD bid on the item. [::::::::]receives regular alerts fromeBay whenKKG items are put up for auction and agreed to notify agents if JIMMYFLATHEAD attempted to purchase'such items in the future. PAITSON was provided with a list of other usernames associated with IVINSto watch for in addition to JIMMYFLATHEAD. |:| did not recognize any of the other usernames. [::::::::]also recognized the usernameJIMMYFLATHEAD from his postings on the KKG entry on Wikipedia.[::::::::]described JIMMYFLATHEAD as having caused a lot of problems for KKG by posting ne i 'nformation about the organization on Wikipedia. recalled92pne particular posting by | sororityF|had at92éheUniversit been Indiana of amember chapter!ofKKG,Delta pledginl the with%;;;3 of NB N stated there had been some [;;:::;], onwhich ove rome KKG nameto whetherremovetheit was[:::::]or postingabout ccor ingtd[::E:::§, this prompted "aggressive"an response from JIMMYFLATHEAD. KKG even consulted with their attorneys to determine if they could take legal action to prevent JIMMYFLATHEAD's postingregarding [:::::::]The sorority was concerned because the "Notable Kap " n ry on the website only contained ten to twelve names, an stood out on the list. It was ultimately decided to flood e o able Kappas list with I v FD-3 02a Rev. 10-6-95! bi bv 2'79A WF 222936 BEI ContinuationFD-302 of i of i , OnU / 8Q '7 / Z0 '70 Page , 3 a lot of namesso that E::::::] inclusion would notbe as obvious. [::::::] expressed some concernfor the nature of IVINS's%JIMMYFLATHEAD'son theKKG Wikipediaentry. postings observed his attitude was at times aggressive, and he seemed to post only information that reflected oorly on the organization such as the information about[::::?]and a hazing incident at DePauw University in which several pledges were branded with cigarettes. The ABC News ro ram 20/20 aired a story onthe incidentin 1997, and[::::E::?commentedthat they thought that was old news, and could not understand why IVINS was bringing it up again. [:::::::] also noted, however, that IVINS/JIMMYFLATHEAD appears to see himself as a guardian of sorts for the organization, and therefore does not necessarily see him as threatening. JIMMYFLATHEAD also posted information regarding the sorority's secret ritual and initiation ceremony, which prompted KKG to again consult legal counsel. The KKG ritual is now copyrighted, so such actions as posting the ritual can be prevented. KKG has been advised that they cannot take action when a few words or sentences are quoted; only if large sections are reprinted without permission. KKG was unable to prevent JIMMYFLATHEAD from posting ritual information on Wikipedia. [::::::] hadheard of an incidentwhethe ritu:§;hnn w olen from a chapter, and asked] L SS [;ff:fE:las wor ed at KKG participateto headquartersthe since| ininterview at this92point. servedI I as Ifrom August] throu Frevieweh June an andsigned nowa Non-Disclosure Agreement before participating in the interview. [:::::::]advised that she remembered hearingin the earl 1980s, prior to[g::;:;]taking over as| n| | that a ritual oo ad been stolen from the chapter at the University of Maryland UMD!, and that a woman, and possibly a man, had somehow been involved in the theft. [:::::::]did not know how it was connected to the theft, but recalled some reference to Rolling Stone magazine.| |and| Iexplained that the ritual book by itself was almost worthless because a cipher was needed to correctly interpret the ritual. It was noted t D chapter closed in 1992, and in follow-up emails from on August 13 and 14, 2007, L F . FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! b6 279A WF-222936 BEI 87¢ ContinuationFD-302I of , On0 / 807 / 20 '7O Page4 , [:::::::] advised that the chapter, whichhad been located at 7404 Princeton1992, Avenue, dueto Fraternity College CouncilPark, Maryland, KKG!action. closed [:::::::Twrote= on Ma 20, This was primarily due to low scholarship, broke the terms of probation and abused alcohol. The chapter had been on probation since 1988. I recall now, a person wrote in the past year on one of [IVINS's] postings, maybe on Wikipedia?! the chapter was closed due to drugs. Considering it was best to leave "sleeping dogs lie" Kappa chose not to start a war with him and let it drop. The chapter was not closed due to drugs, it was closed due to an accumulation of their past 4 years of poor behavior and indifference to changing. 92 Neither| |nor| lwere familiar withthe name I Isearched the KKG database for references to| I but couldfind nothingthat matchedthe name. ' Park in Columbus, ' 'not mean anything t-thr" * 1| *|o e1 er or although hought%. a conservatory was located at the park. Both noted that Columbus is located in Franklin County, and that many places in the area carry the name Franklin. Access to KKG Headquarters is from Franklin Avenue, but| End] here not aware of any other KKG affiliation with the name "Franklin" or "Franklin Park". Later on the samedate,[::::::]contacted agents by telephone because[::]had eral letters referencing IVINS. Agents returned to office, where they were joined by the attorney resents KKG and with whom - agents had previously spoken. then provided agents with three typed letters described below: "FraternityThe first letter Ritualist"identified was dated Januaas Ef::%:l 1985,only In fromthe the letter, the ritualist compared ritual materia o tained through an ad in Rolling Stone magazine with the KKG Book of Ritual. Y £ P>|'| . W g FD-302:1 Rev.10-6-95! b6 b7C 279A WF 222936 BEI Continuationof FD-302of 4 I , On8 O0/ / 7 20 Q 7 , Page5_ y The ritualist determined that the material may have been obtained from an unidentified local source due to discrepancies between that material and the official Book of Ritual. The second letter was dated March 14, 1985, from an attorney representing KKG at that time. _Several unrelated issues are addressed in the letter, in addition to the apparent absence of legal remedies to address "the University of Maryland's free copies and Rolling Stones advertisement." Without'more explanation as to the source of this information, the attorney states, "Since the identity of the passer out of the ritual in Maryland shows that it is probably a DR. BRUCE IVANS, perhaps a little more information can be discovered about who he is and then a confrontation with him for whatever good it would do." The letter implies that KKG is not certain that IVANS believed to be IVINS! is "the man that did it." The third letter was dated September 10, 1985, also * from KKG'sattorney, and addressed "the repeating problem [they had] encountered with unauthorized copying and disclosures of the content of the Kappa initiation manual." The attorney advised that while KKG may have a legal remedy under copyright and trademark law, such action would involve "considerable expense and long delay". The attorney also mentions that the "putative infringer" has not yet been identified, and references them as him or her. The attorney suggests that this "harassment" may be constitute criminal violations, and although the charges would likely be minor, they may have a deterrent effect. .l [:::::::]offered interviewing agents a copy of an almunae directory published in 2004. The directory is enclosed in a 1A 7426, along with the original notes of this in rvi w [;:;;:::]and the originalthe three Non Disclosureletters recovered Agreements signed by H I b and o ow up emails from August 13 and 14, 2007, and the email attachment listing the KKG convention sites. . I 1 ,_| ALL I J t»tTIL'Jl!J E3I~I'I AI]hIED spilt 5 UNCLASSIFIED FD3°2OR 1 6$5! DATE 12-09-zoos Bj'5oa24 UE BAHfR3fL5C - 1 _ FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date of transcription O 9 Z 10 Z 2 O 92 On September10. 2007,| I SSANI I | was rntervreweu-asi tpIECE'Jf telephone employment. I number ] 4; email a ress __ was| telephone number advisedreviewing of and t e signing identity a Non Disclosureof Ehe intervlewihg Agreement,E:f¬%:ffjwasagent er advised of the nature of the interview and provided the following information: | Iattended the Universit of Cincinnati from 1964 to 1969. 'in received thei a| Ideqree in | Iattending the University of] Hwas_a_meTber of While Kappa Kappa Gamma sororitv KKGL, and served as I participate in KKG during _ 5| year 0 school.|did no lived in the KKG chapter house off and on during 92 year. [:::::::]vms aware of only one incidentwhen there were attempts to discover some of the "confidential" aspects of the sorority, when university officials wanted all of the sororities on springcampus of E;:f:;;;;;]year to rovide "confidential" l968!.[::::::::]couldinformation during not recallthe specifical y w a ype of information was requested by the administration sororities butmember believed selectionit processes.[:::::::i may have been re arding also doesthe not_ recall whether or not part of the information requested was related to sorority rituals.[::::::::]remembers being in meetings regarding this disclosure of information only with other sororit residents y p , a oesnd d no t 'remf?Eff:in fraternity officers bein g involved in he di scuss i ons . was asked to complete a form, and sought advice from the KKG national office, possibly consulting with the National President at that time. After reviewingl lyearbook from l968,| lalso recalled that| lwas Investigation on O 9/1 O / 2 OQ '7 FiIe# 279A WF 222936 BEI ==-[D5] oaiedaated 09/10/2007 W SAI | | This itand document its contents contains are not neither to berecommendations distributed outside nor your conclusions agency.of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; '~ I 92 FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 1:16 b7C 2'79A WF-222936 BEI ~ Continuation of FD-302 of _ ,.On 0 9 / 1 O 2/ O07 , Page 2 involved in those meetings.I Ialso mentioned I wasthe Dean of Students at that time.I Idid not know why the information was being requested an a so i not know whether the University initiated this action on their own, or whether they were responding to issues raised by external sources, stateschool such during as the the State time[::::::£]attended!. of Ohio the university It became was noteda _ that during this time frame in the late 1960's, cultural and racial explaindiversity a request was for membergaining national selection attention, whichinformation. might I I su 99 ested contactin 9I I whoI I Delta dated brieTau Delta y fraternity.I [Jwas year in school inI Iclassand was a member ofand stayed on at the school working in In such capacity, and having serve EEEE§§§i}] more a out whatof[:::]fraternity[:::;;:;] was being reque e of thoughtE:ff ::Imay_kgowthe sororities and why, and whether or not similar information had been requested of the fraternities. [:::::::]noted that[::::::]has "done very well for himself", has given significant amounts of money to the school over the years, and was the graduation speaker last June. did not recognize the name BRUdE IVINS however, when as shown a photocopy of a photograph of IVINS from hig sc oo , she thought he looked familiar. A Efidfffid co of an email from IVQNS, whichindicated he met a ndI ' in an American ' Literature to[;;::;:gfor coursereview. at the In University his email, IVINSof Cincinnati, describedwas the providedwomen as e s ars" of the class who were helpful to other students "not as talented".E::::::::]did not remember anything about the class,thought except it mi h thathav it was beennot a courseI[::ltook a freshman-level E:fjjunior urse. [:::::::] or I senior year. did not remember VINS from the class. although[:fEf:f;Tdid ek system not thinkat the non Greek university students was very would large, haveand been stigmatize by not joining a fraternity or sorority, [:::::::]did think someone who was not a member of a fraternity or sorority could feel "left out" or not part of the "in crowd", particularly if they had tried to join a house. [::::::::]described the KKG chapter at the University of Cincinnati as the best sorority on campus because they had very FD-302:1 Rev.10-5-95! b7 , 279A WF 222936 BEI ContinuationFD-302I I ofof , OnO/ l 9 0/ 20 Q '7, Page ginvolved - oo ing incampus me ers, maintainedactivities l [:::£%:fathought h rades, and were that if verythe KKG chapterood l was k' notmb the best sorority ' ' h' at the University of Cincinn ti a 't ' 1 Theta K , i was certain y one of the top three, along with appa Alpha Theta! and Tri Delt Delta Delta Delta!. friendlydescribed the members as " 1 ladies" who were very and notsnobs, although[:f?Tacknowledgedthata man tryingto get a date with a member might have a different perspect ive. - According to|;::::::11KKGsocialized primarilywith other fr aternities, and thought most women in the chapter dated fraternity members. | |suggested that someone who was not a member of a fraternity would have a hard time "finding an in" with a sorority member. [:::::::]cou1d not recall anyone dating or showing attention to someone for the purpose of making fun of or embarrassing them. The name was not fami92liartol I . Iii located a psychology major named| Iin her yearbook for 1968, and provided the interviewing agent with a photocopy theof pagewith| Iphotograph page[::::] [::::::1 provided[::]yearbooksfor 1965through 1969 for revi ew. There were no entries in the indexes for IVINS, and he was n ot observed in an of the organizati raphs reviewed , toc in 1 ude the[f::;:::::]of whichT?:?E?f?jwas' a member. It was noted that t e University had a large pharmaceutical program, and there were student organizations for the Amer Tribunal immediat related included ican Pharmaceutical Association and a Pharmaceutical students. No other science related organizations were elyto observed, chemical engineering.[??EE:f::Tnoted with the ex i n f organizationsthe indexes that references to individual photos of students as well as ifIVINS a ppearin in g g ro hup p ot hograp s.{::;::;;:]thoughtthat was icturedp y in a ear boo , k ' indivi ua y or as part of a group, his name would have appeared in the index, unless it had been inadvertently left out. - lj l FD-302a10-6-95! Rev. i 2'79A WF 222936 BEI bg b7C ummmwnmsmof| I ,On09/10/2007 ,Pge_An ofrecalled any issues that theregarding ritualKKG book ritu atEi:?Tchapter ring thatwas time. kept [:::::::]"locked up" but thatE::]remembers usingthe bookto memorize[::]role in the ceremonies as chapter president. E::::::]volunteered that[;;]couldunderstand a why non-Greek£raternity's student mightbecause[::;]recalled be rituals intereste in a sorority fascinated being or by Whenthe secret askedaboudiiiU£ather'ssocie f Masons,which| o involvement, Fatherwasstated member. a hewas never active in the Masons, and it is not something that would have comeup when[:::]wasin college. 92 The Non-Disclosure Agreementsigned by[:::::::]is enclosed in a 1A envelope with the original notes of this interview' redacteda P yq ii ii along email with andthe hotoco hotoco iedP P of the icturespage from 1968 yearbookpicturing[::?::::::?f::1 I .1 1 I' 4 ' ALL Inrn nri III1lI~i'I AII~l'EIJ = HREIH Is _ CLASSIFIED FD3°2Oh'1°6$5! DATE 12-as-some Br @0324 UCBiwrnsrrsc -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION b6 b7C Date of transcription O 9 Z O6 Z 2 OO '7 92 E:::::::]On wasinterviewed September 6,at 2 residence, E AN| | I te ep one number After bein dvised of the identity of the intervi ing agen s, reviewed and signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement, and provided the following information: [::;:::::::]attended the University of Cincinnati from 1964 throug 1968, where was a member of Kappa Kappa Gamma KKG, Kappa! sorority. lived at home throughout college, as did many students who attended the Universit of Cincinnati anJ:::::;:t:::;;]and never and resided remembersin most ofthe KKG the house.[::::::::f:]wasclasses were re ative y sma , with the exception of some required courses. E::::::::] described the required Biology course as a large lecture-type class; indicated A hemet[::::::EE]redacted co of and| an emai from BRUC}92§YINSwhich|in n American Literature course at the University o Cincinnati was provided [E?{;;;;;5::] ' andEff:fffiias w.the In his "stars" email,of the IVINSclas described who were helpful to other students "not as talented" remembers a course in . American . Literature| . i took| I year, Literature.and believes The course the course lasted was one called year, Ameri and wasan Traditions of in the class[:::::::::::::]year, 1965 1966. E::::::::::hoes not remember, however, anyone named BRUCE IVINS, and specifically does not remember IVINS as being enrolled in the literature class. [:::::::::]was shown photocopies ofpictures of IVINS toi?:Eif:Ei¬E:ffE2jprovided frfour ' ' l yearbook, but yearbooks from IVINS did not the look Universityfamiliar of Cincinnati, covering the years 1965 through 1968, explaining that only seniors individual photos were included. IVINS was not listed in the index of any of the yearbooks. [::;Jwould [:::::::::]have helped couldanother not think studentof in any that circumstance class, stating in whichthe ma erial did not lend itself to working with other students. investigation on O 9/6/2 OOD7 at . File# 279A~WF 222936-BEI '/ gl Date divfated Q9/06/2007 SA by PI This itand document its contents contains are not neither to berecommendations distributed outside nor your conclusions agency.of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; |:|;252>0'7 -?>o,;>. 1 l FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 BEI 32, ContinuationFD-3 02I I of of , On0 /9 Q6 / 2 O 7 O ,Page 2 [:::lrememberedcourse thenot was discussiona where class Thestu ent only wouldcourset?ffifi: ijremembers i 'each h other as part of or tutoringhelping the courseother students with was a course in logic. [:::::::::]al oes not remember in in the American literature class i r rity sister who had pledged KKG with thought ma ave taken a psychology course during summer school with The Greek s stem at the University of Cincinnati was described by as fairly large, but thought only 30 Accordingpercent of the student to body the was KKG house in a fraternity was the[2bif2:h2nfj or sorority. on 92 campus, along wit Kappa Alpha Theta Theta!. admitted that the Kappas were known to be "kind of snooty", but [:::]was not aware of any instance where membersdid anything mean to other students. The KKG house is at the same location today as in the 1960s - 2801 Clifton, Cincinnati, Ohio. KKG did not host many parties on their own, but would typically partner with a fraternity or other house. E:::::::::]recalled that the women attended many parties hosted by other houses. The only activitycleaning Kappa thechapter pledges were requiredhouseevery Saturday to participate morning. ' [if:%if::::] did not know of any hazing of KKG pledges. [:::::::::]was not aware of any instanceinvolving the theftincident of ritual had materials,taken ace at any and had school.;:::;::::::]did not heard that any such notknow anyonexnamed , and was not ami iar with the name. A was liste in the yearbook for 1968, but did not in ica e a sorority affiliation. [:::::::::] could not recall a ny p ra kn s, rai s, d or otherwiseagents thatunusualbecause[:::]did incidents involvingnot livein the theKKGhouse,E::fjmay hous minding not have been aware of such activities. - The University of Cincinnati KKG chapter Beta Rho membership,Deuteron! had closedthat at one butwas long time, po beforeTii?if:?ff]was ' to lowa studentat the school. 1 D ' u FD-302a Rev.1o-s-95! ~ b6 92 b-/L 279A WF 222936-BEI Con nuationFD-302___| of of , OnO / 9O6 2/ 0O7 , Page .3-_. provide more[::::::;:::]suggested in ormation activities or thaJMMMMMMMMHwouldbe incidents ableto involving theKKG house.| llived in the houseand ma have served| |recalled[:::::¥:] was very involved in campus activities and ma have remained involved with KKG after qradhatin . also suggested Fgents speak wit nd] |graduated | Wlth|' I in' 1968 and wa§ also involved with campus and KKG activities. I [:iememhTrhaving aswas thea| onlv KKG Idegree. member uld stated was in class, but Ideqree Proqram I was a programt oughth mayprobably have transferreso into . Ehe.graguateqa University .of Ialso Cincinnati. The Non DisclosureAgreement signedby [::::::::]is enclosed in a 1A envelope with the original notes of this interview and the redacted email and photocopied pictures reviewed lei ALL II-TFUPIYULTIUIIICU]-TFAIDTQD HE ISI]192IlIL31,SSIFIE[I92 DA 2 lI!§* 2DClS BY I5lIl232%UC BAII.T,"'R5.-"LSC Automated Serial Permanent Charge Out FD-5a l 5 94! Date: O3/12/O8 Time: 09:05 Case ID: 279A-WF 222936-BEI Serial: 111 b6 Description of Document: b7C Type = FD302 Date = os/27/07 To = WASHINGTON FIELD From = WASHINGTON FIELD Topic:| IINTERVIEWED ATI | Reason for Permanent Charge Out: serial transferredto sub[::]at request sa[::::::::::]of Transferred to: Case ID:279A WF~222936{:::::Feria1: 84 Employeeq sh! a > ' iii IIJt D .TII31!1In1m1I1-n:1:- 1: V HEREIN » iNEL&§5IFIED FD30Z@wm1069 DATE la 9 £DDd B? 60324 UC BAUfR5fL5E -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION b 6 Dmedumwmm O8{29[2007 b7C ugust 21, 2007, provided the following information: I lgrew up in |where| I 1;? 92 Investigation0 8 on1 O 0 7 at I File# 279A WF 222936 BEI ~-92 Date dictated bYSA This documentcontains neitherrecommendations conclusionsnor ofthe FBI. It is the propertyof the FBI andis loanedto youragency; it and its contentsare not to be distributed outsideyour agency. rt F1!_3¬ R¢v_10-6-95! Q I-IEPEII , ALL Iii TIIIIIILELSSIFIEEII$3.1-IATIIJHCCIIIIITAII-TED I DATE l2 iII9 2EiEJB BY 6-Cl32'~1BATH.-*"H5fLL':ilI TIC ! -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION / '12 b 7 C . Date of transcription O 9Z 11 Z 2O O'7 pre arranged,On the mopgrsonnel ning the of September pertainingfile 07, 2007, United writerto reviewed, States Army as Medical Research Inst tute of Infectious Diseases USAMRIID! employee, BRUCEIVINS?92Date Birth: of April 22, 1946, Social :Security Account Number; 280-44-5449. IVINS's personnel file contained six sections, t ese sections are further described as: I. Notification of Personne Actions -USAMRIID Form 7: documents changes.in pay and time off awards between September 09, 2001 and January 09, 2005. -USAMRIID Form 7/7B: documents pay adjustments and other personnel actions between January 12, 1992 and June 14, 2001. -USAMRIID Form 7: documents pay adjustments and other personnel action between December 02, 1980, and October O6, 1991, as well as "SAEDA Training" dates also during this period. . Standard Forms 50-B SF 50B!: documents pay adjustments, individual cash awards, individual time off awards, change in FEGLI, individual suggestion/invention award, and other personnel action notifications dated December 02, 1983, through January 08, 2006. WFO NOTE: Enclosed in the FD=340 associated with this communication are photocopies all of the above mentioned records.! II. Performance Appraisal Chronological compilation of annual and semiannual performance appraisal. It should be noted, IVINS consistently rated "exceptional." Review of this section noted no derogatory ratings or comments. WFO NOTE: due to the voluminous section of this file only photocopies of Performance Appraisals dated 2001 are enclosed in the FD 34O associated with this communication.! III. Miscellaneous Forms Investigation on O9/ O 7 /2 Q O7 at FOI t Detrick , Maryland File# 279A WF-222936-BEI- U3 Date dictatedN/A by Special Agent I This documentcontains neitherrecommendations norconclusions ofthe FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contentsare not to be distributed outsideyour agency. FD~302a Rev.10-6-95! - Q 1 Q 279A WF 222936 BEI ContinuationFD-302 of of , On O 9/ O '72 OO / '7, Page 2 FEGLI Insurance forms, CFC contribution forms and other miscellaneous forms. IVINS has been a longtime before September 2001! CFC contributor to the Frederick County Chapter of the American Red Cross. A thorough review of this section noted only one form, a CFC contribution form, signed and dated by IVINS in 2001; specifically October 31, 2001. Review of this section noted no other pertinent information. WFO NOTE: enclosed in the FD 34O associated with this communication are photocopies of a change in health benefits form dated December 20, 1980, as well as a CFC contribution form dated October 18, 2006.! IV. Time Off Awards and other Certificates of Achievement/Awards Letter of Appreciation dated July 07, 1984, regarding IVINS conducting a re certification cardiopulmonary resuscitation course for the medical staff at USAMRIID. Numerous other awards, certificates, and letters were contained therein, and thoroughly examined. Review of this section noted no derogatory information. WFO NOTE: enclosed in the FD 34O associated with this communication is a photocopy of the above mentioned Letter of Appreciation.! V. Training Reimbursement Requests, SF 5OBs, and other miscellaneous forms. -DD Form 1556-1, a reimbursement request for IVINS pertaining to his attendance a course entitled "Lyophilization: a short course," course dates June 18- 20, 1996, held at the Sheraton Hotel, Baltimore, Maryland. Confirmation Notice/facsimile pertaining to the same. Course description pertaining to the same. -Certificate dated September 1992 regarding a Good Laboratory Practices course presented by the Center for Professional Advancement. -DD Form 2556-1, a reimbursement request for IVINS pertaining to his attendance to a Good Laboratory Practice course held by the "Ctr for Professional Advancement," mailing address East Brunswick, NJ"; 0 I ,< 6- < O FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 BEI cmmwmmo pamor ,OnO9/O7/2007 ,m§ v_3_ however, it would appear the course was held at Fort Detrick, building 830 on September 16-17, 1992. Review indicated no other pertinent information was contained in this section.. WFO NOTE: enclosed in the FD 34O associated with this communication are photocopies of all of IVINS's training reimbursement requests.! VI. Employment Application, scholastic records, and personal information update form. Review indicated no other pertinent information was contained in this section. WFO NOTE: enclosed in the FD 340 associated with this communication are photocopies of IVINS's handwritten employment application.! 4 _i___ A , OQev.0l-31-2003! FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ALL IHFUEHATIUH IDMTAINED _ HFEIH I5 UNCLASSIFIED DATE l2 lU*2UUE E? 5U324 UE EAWKREI EL Precedence: ROUTINE Date: O9/O6/2007 92 To: Washington Field Attn: AMX SSA SA l he From. CIRG b"C NCAVC/BAU-1 Contact: SSAIi Approved By: Drafted B>~| '| Case ID #2 ' 2'79A-WF 222936 BEIH4 Pending!; Title: AMERITHRAX; MAJORCASE 184' GRANDJURY MATERIAL - DISSEMINATE PURSUANT TORULE 6 ! "92 b § /I Synopsis: I I i*3 7C Referen Ce: 279A WF 222936 POI Serial 1477 A . . Details Downloaded 1--iii.._i_.. T-R ' 7 92.'" Q Q To: Washington Field From: CIRG Re: 279A WF 222936 BEI, O9/06/2007 136 7- A meeting was held on July 18, 2007 at the UVA, between the Amerithrax Task Force, the Behavioral Analysis Unit, and Dr. | |M.D., to discuss these issues. I 2 L i. To: Washington Field From: CIRG ' Re: 279A WF 222936 BEI, O9/O6/2007 LEAD s!: Set Léad 1: Action! WASHINGTON FIELD AT WASHINGTON O0 -k ~ b6 3 I i I §_ I _W~ EL _ ALL IHFURHATIDN CONTAINED FD-1023 6-22-2007! Rev. - e ¬n1 l *"l'3"3'3"3'5 Is T,TI1I|_,LA5EIFIED65324 CU BAUERSKLSE H FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: O9/12/2007 Case ID: 279A WF 222936 BEI Rending! 9292f§ bi | Contact Date: O9/05/2007 Type of Contact: Email Location: I l b6 b7C Written by:Special Agent[:::::::::::::] Other s! Present:_ N/A Source Reporting: CHS, who is in a position to testify, provided the following information: I As previouslv reported,CHS aqreedto provide writer b7D with _ .. 06 07C e92a.~1> _1_ I I G HEP AL E17-!l*5'_ie.'f'IClI-I I3 UIIELAESIFIEDIIEII-TTAII-IED DATE l2~lEl 2ElCl8 BY 60324 UII EMUR3,- LSC 279A-WF-222936 BEI -elll AKL : akl 1 b6 b7C On 09/21/2007,S re qu ested NCIC offline records checks for BRUCE EDWARDSIVINS, DOB 04/22/1946, SSAN280-44-5449. sA| Iwas advised by|:| | |CJIS, that the records of offline inquiries date ac on y to 1990. Acopy ofthe recordsprovided by[::::::::] are attached for reference. Z : I ALL 13lI'LLTIE92I1II:I:III]rI .g.II|IEI: HERE S III-IIILASSIFIED DATE 1. ll'l DI'I'3Ii? CEl"2% U!" BMI* :l'1,- L§.1lI | IM From: CJlS! FBl! Sent: 7 11:50 AM To. WF! FBl! Subject: Offline search results UNCLASSIFIED b6 NON-RECORD b7l_'i - -~ FE 12 KB! EXAMPLE OFHYP SEARCH-b&w.doc Attached arethe resultsfor your search on lvins, andan examplesheet to help youread them.T I I hanks. UNCLASSIFIED 1 EUHTAIHED ' Q HPEIALL 0 ID1'L&TIC|I-I UNCLASSIFIED DATE 12-10-2003 BY 60330 UC BIWEFQ L¬C I bé b7C TITLE: 2007000000 TYPE; HYP NEED; UNI FILE: BEGIN DATE: 19900101 END DATE! 20070920 LIST TYPE LST FILE SIZE: 000000000 COUNT: 000000 RANDOM NUMBER LIST! IMAGE INDICATOR: FIELDS SEARCHED; NAM/IVINS,[email protected]/280445449 ~ FIELDS OUTPUT! D 1E 2007-07 30 19.24.35.246266 1N01TVEPN7Z57329052.QW.VAUSC6099.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE EDWARDS.DOB/19460422.ENS/N ORI IS US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-5000 1E 2007-07-30-16.59.07.134459 1NO1TVEPN7257146613.QW.VAUSC6099. NAM/IVINS,BRUCE EDWARDS.DOB/194604 ORI IS US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 77 2007-01-07-15.32.53.674305 1N01EI064MRID064YOR.QW.MD0110005. NAM/IVINS,BRUCE EDWARDS.DOB/194604 22.ENS/N ORI IS FREDERICK CO SO FREDERICK 301 600-1046 2D 2006-12-27-20.25.12.140453 1N01CQUAHR523200232.QW.VAINS02T3. NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 22.SEX/M ORI IS US INS SERVICE INS ARLINGTON DISTRICT OFFICE 703 235-6700 77 2006-10-23-12.00.24.202153 1N01EI064MRID8774WN.QW.MDMSP6011. NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.SOC/280445449 ORI IS MD STATE POLICE LICENSING DIVISION PIKESVILLE 410 799-0190 77 2006-10-Z3-12.00.13.0Z4641 1N01EI064MRID8774V5.QW.MDMSP6011. ORI IS MD STATE POLICE LICENSING NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.SOC/280445449 77 2006-10-23-12.00.01.467902 DIVISIONPIKESVILLE 799-0190 410 1N01EI064MRID8774SQ.QW.MDMSP6011. ORI IS MD STATE POLICE LICENSING 77 2006 02 14 13.52.29.935244 NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.SOC/280445449 1N01EI064MRID187ZJM.QW.MDMSP6011. DIVISIONPIKESVILLE 799-0190 410 NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.SOC/280445449 Page 1 . L . X ORI IS MD STATE POLICE LICENSING DIVISION PIKESVILLE 410 799-0190 77 2005-12-30 14.07.20.478944 lNO1EI064MRIDA3E1MK.QW.MDOl10319.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE EDWARDS.DOB/19460422 ORI Is FREDERICK PD 301 694-2100 13 Z005 l2 19 19.33.06.576860 1N0l1000002619049.QTP.WVIAF0000.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE EDWARDS.DOB/11111111.19460422.SEX/M.RAC/U.SOC/280445449.ICN/ISISO001000002619049.TCN /.LRI/WVBIO0OOZ.ON1/CJIS DIVISION FBI.ONZ/BIOTERRORISM.ON3/CJIS BIOTERRORISM.OAC/CLARKSBURG.SIG/WV.ZIP/Z6306. cT1/304625-4900.EML/BIO@LEO DOT!G0v.TOT/INTERNAL- FEDERAL APPLICANT.DFP/20031008.RFP/BIOTERRORISM ACT IDE/20051216 ORI Is FBI PDS CRIMINAL INFORMATION AND TRANSITION 304 625-2752 77 2005-08-09-15.54.21.022723A 1N01EDO20MRID646IRS.QPO.MDMSP60l7.NAM/IVINS, BRUCE.DOB/19460422.SEX/M.RAC/W ORI Is MD STATE POLICE LICENSING DIvIsIoN PIKESVILLE 410 799-0190 77 2004-1l 17 11.06.06.661988 1N01ED020MRID8X98G0.QPO.MDMSP60l0.NAM/IVINS, BRUCE EDWARDS.DOB/19460422.SOC/280445449 ORI IS MD STATE POLICE LICENSING DIVISION PIKESVILLE 410 799-0190 77 2003 11 l4 O9.26.40.288675 1N0lEI020MRID8TOZGV.QW.MD01604V0.NAM/IVINS, BRUCEEDWARDS.DOB/19460422.SEX/M.RAC/W ORI IS MONTGOMERY COUNTY PD ROCKVILLE 240 773-5330 13 2003 10 22 08.30.44.392858 lN014000028283396.QTP.WVIAF0000.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE EDWARDS.DOB/11111111.19460422.SEX/M.RAC/U.0CA/280445449.SOC/280445449.ICN/IFCSO00400 0028283396.TcN/0702828334.LRI/wvBI0000z.0N1/cJIs DIVISION FBI.ONZYBIOTERRORISM.ON3/CJIS BIOTERRORISM.OAC/CLARKSBURG.SIG/WV.ZIP/26306. TOT/MISCELLANEOUS APPLICANTcss SUBMISSION.DFP/20031008.RFP/BIOTERRORISM ACT.IDE/20031022 ORI IS FBI PDS CRIMINAL INFORMATION AND TRANSITION 304 625-2752 2D 2003 10 20 10.24.51.675057 1NO1CQUQE3C88800888.QW.VATRE0199.NAM/IVINS,BRUCEIDOB/19460422 ORI IS U S TREASURY FINANCIAL CRIMES ENF NET ARLINGTON 703 905 3664 1E 2003 O4 O4 03.38.10.869427 lL01Q23EN3056417046.QW.VAUSC6099.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 26 2003-03-2s-17.40.48.553908 ' - 1LOlS2DJN305Z721270.QW.VAUSC6099,NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORIIS US CUST SERVENFORCEMENT NEWINGTON SYSTEMS921-6000 703 1E 2002-09-12-08.55.08.6939Z5 1L0lQ3R7N2086267568.QW.VAUSC6099.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 77 Z002 08 10 01.18.30.913200 - 1L01ZNG30Z81000l223.QW.MD0160205.NAM/IVINS, BRUCE EDWARDS.SEX/M.RAC/W.DOB/19460422 ORI IS GAITHERSBURG PD 301 258-6400 1E 2002 O8 02 14.l9.32.231076 lL0lP3ACN2065060024.QW.VAUSC6099.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS US CUSTSERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 1E Z0O2 O8 02 14.l6.43.261715 1L0lP6XNN0802000098.QW.VAUSC6099.NAM/IVINS,B;UCE.DOB/19460422Page ' JIIu_I|_ ._;Iu. b6 |:|.m b7C ORI IS US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 ZC 1998-09-11-10.16.35.520000 1L01P342N0911010021.QW.VAUSC6099.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/042246 ORI IS US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 43 1998-09-06-18.12.46.610000 2 1LO1P6E5N0907010024.QW.VAUSC6099.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/042246 ORI IS us CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 67 _1995-09-22-14.02.24.21000O 1LOlP2KHN0922020111.QW.VAUSC60I0.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/042246 ORI IS US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON 703 921-6000 U 81 2007-06-19 07.35.33.988724 1N01TCLARK1.QWA.DCFBIWAK1.NAM/IVINS, BRUCE.DOB/19460422.SEX/M.RAC/U.SOC/280445449 ORI IS FBI NCIC 2D 2006 11 07 10.11.18.989116 304 625-3000 1N0lCQURRZN09200092.QW.DCFBITGT3.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE. ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DOB/19460422 2D 2006-11-07-10.10.31.454983 202 324-3000 1N01CQURRZN09100091.QW.DCFBITGT3.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE. ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DOB/19460422 2D 2006-11-07-10.10.06.301989 202 324-3000 1N0lCQURRZN09000090.QW.DCFBITGT3.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DOB/19460422.SOC/280445449 2D 2006-11-07-10.09.08.855048 202 324-3000 1N01CQURRZN08900089.QW.DCFBITGT3.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DOB/19460422.SOC/280445449 2D 2006-11-07 10.08.49.354933 202 324-3000 1N01CQURRZN08800088.QW.DCFBITGT3.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DOB/19460422.SOC/280445449 60 2003-10-08-09.18.02.674195 202 324-3000 lN0lFLS038Z850380.QW.FLFBIMM0l.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422.SEX/M.RAC/U.SOC/28044544 9 ORI IS FBI MIAMI I305 944-9101 64 2003-08-26-05.38.32.034908 1N01DC0005991189.QW .DCFBIWF00.NAM/IVINS, BRUCE .DOB/19460422.RAC/U.SEX/M ORI IS FBI FIELD OFFICE WASHINGTON 202 278-2000 8A 2002-05 30 00.51.18.544805 1L0lUFB5 DQ .QW.IDFBIP000.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE E.DOB/19460422.SEX/M.RAC/U ORI IS POCATELLO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CENTER 208 238-5000 8A 2002-05-30-00.51.11.169572 lL01UFB5 DQ .QW.IDFBIP000.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE E.DOB/19460422.SEX/M.RAC/U ORI IS POCATELLO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CENTER 208 238-5000 8A 2002-05-30-00.47.13.236329 lLOlUFB5 QW .QW.IDFBIP000.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422.RAC/U.SEX/M.SOC/280445449 ORI IS POCATELLO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CENTER 208 238-5000 2D 2002-02-13-09.54.47.449253 . E.DOB/19460422 1L0lCQUQVZA10300103.QW.DCFBITGT5.NAM/IVINS,B§UCEPage 123 |:|1IX'C T E ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 202 324-3000 }: 'C 2D 2002-02-O9-09.34.2l.780362 ' 1L0lCQUQVZA08000080.QW.DCFBITGT6.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE E.DOB/19460422 ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 202 324-3000 2D 2002-02-09-09.33.05.400478 . lL01CQUQVZA07800078.QW.DCFBITGT5.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 202 324-3000 2D 2002-02-09-09.32.55.133818 1L0lCQUQVZA07700077.QW.DCFBITGT6.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 202 324-3000 2D 2002-02-09-09.32.46.l19Z9l 1L01CQUQVZA07600076.QW.DCFBITGT6.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 202 324-3000 2D 2002-02-09-09.32.10.l29748 1L01CQUQVZA07500075.QW.DCFBITGT6.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAUOF INVESTIGATION 202 324-3000 2D 2002 02 O9 O9.31.56.324730 lL0lCQUQVZA07400074.QW.DCFBITGT6.NAM/IVINS,BRUCE.DOB/19460422 ORI IS FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 202 324-3000 THE DATA PROVIDED IS FROM THE BDAT THROUGH THE FOLLOWING DATE: 09-20-2007 ***END OF REPORT*** REPORT DATE: 09-21-2007 TOTAL RECORDS REPORTED: 42 TOTAL RECORDS PROCESSED: Page 4 I I 1 - ALL FLlPl'U!.TIClI ICEII-ZTAIIIED I-Dig DA l~ 1» lU ;:.ClEl>;15 '~ 1TI!-IELASEIIFIED »BY 50324 U_." BP.T.|I;"R;3.- LEI- - EXAMPLE OF NCIC OFF LINE HYPER SEARCH Sample I G * A * B * [N CI C inquiry Transaction] 53 199l-01-10-O4.l5.5l.930000 * c .*D*E* F * be | b iC KEY: A. Date of inquiry Year - Month - Day ! B. Time of transaction always in eastem time/ hour, minute, seconds,milliseconds! C. Header sequence ofcharacters acceptableto NCIC which is usedto provide message informationfor the control tenninal agency. D. Message Key E. ORI Originating AgencyIdenti er, agencywho initiatedthe inquiry! F. Searchable information G. Line number of circuit over which transactionwas receivedand responsewas returned *The reportbeing sent to you re ects all transactionsthat match the searchcriteria youprovided, including thename andphone number of the agency thatmade theinquiry. If you needthe entire transactionthat includesthe responseNCIC returnedto the inquiry, please contact the analystthat conducted the search. » 1 Q l I ALEQEIPJ-mtzum IEIIIJTAII-TED FD4023 Rmn6Q2QO0D ETE . A 2- 1 iiU EI§5§IFIED ZJJ~ 'I & dm E a" % UE BAH.- F5 L5' SE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: O9/27/2007 Case ID:279A~WF-22936 BEI -H7Pending! Iii} I IPending! Contact Date: 09/18/2007 , Type of Contact: Telephonic Location.. I _ b7c I b6 Written by:Special Agent[:::::;;;;;;;] Other s! Present: N/A Source Reporting: Individual, whois in a positionto testify, I I Iprovided the following information: I 92 b5 Lqin theEIINB,B3 hotsuiteI hadgbeen strange[:::] behavior I I Earlier in the wee IVINS was cleaning bf/C out the freezer in his laboratory within the B3 hot suite. When IVINS was queried if he wanted assistance by a fellow co- 137D worker IVINS responded no.I I [::::::j IVINS is not known forpro actively cleaning; nor is Iassistance/doIVINS knownfor refusingfor him.tFe Q fst itto haleSQm Qn@ elseI I IIVINS instructed a co worker to autoclave a container of bleach from his hood in his laboratory within the B3 hot suite. The co worker was astounded by this request as bleach containers, and their contents, were never autoclaved in the past ' rker thissubsequently wasappropriate; thewhichE:ffi;f§§pfnde suit B3asked rvisor,[;:fif:ff:ij to wasifand ~ot 1 workernot to do as something IVINS hadto the instructed.effect remarked of either theco workerE?iii:::] to th needing to baby sit IVINS in the hot suite. b6 "w~ Iv 60 - .ALL ' HERE Rniriin: TEIIILASSIFIED EUHTAINED ' Fnso20m.1o6@s! DATE 12-LU-EDIB ET 50224 UC BAWEREILSC s -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 92 Date of transcription10[O4,[200'7 137 I.» 135 I Ida,j;e of birthI I residing atI Fh telephone numberI Iwas interviewed atI Iplace of I emplovment at we W work phon I provideI Isocial securit number. After being advised of the identity of the special ag t and postal inspector, the purpose of the interview and completinga non-disclosure agreement,I:I provided the following information: completed IinI L1 I completed t atthethe CollegeI University oof eaving com inI-P leted at foundthe emP loYment a I S I ' I I startinq inI I Istated thatI I_had. never heard or nor met %v%s. provide-Idname the Qf_I Ias a possible I _p§rson to talk with as I also |_providedI Ias anotherpossible individualto talk with I IthouqhtThe name thatsounded perhapshad vaguely workeiiI familiar and I ThenameI Isounded vaguely familiarand I I thought perhapsI I Investigation on 1 0/ O 3/ 2 O O7 b6 Fi|e# 279A-wF-22g935_BE1- ictated 10/04/2007 b7a <~ IUS PostalInspector by SA I Thisit dandits contents areto be notdistributed tions noryour conclusions outside agency.ofthe IFBI. it is the property of the FBI andis loanedto your agency; FD-302a10-6-95! Rev. I 279A WF 222936 EEC Continuationof __| 0fFD-302 l , On0 1 0/ / 32 0 7 0, Page 2 the name. o opinedthat the[;::;;::]namecould-sound familiar as as the name of a ui inq on the campus of the University of| I _ile atI Iwasmember a Kapgg of Kapp o ' I Idescribed|[::]college involvement with Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority as "being in a sorority was not a big deal to me" n "I was not your typical sorority member."[::::] stated that was much more interested in science and did not reside in the sorority house. ' lhave[:::::;l£2%ld discussedaffiliationnot recall any Kappa instancewithin whichGamma. Kappa would On oneoccasion, in the 1977to 1987 time frame,[:::::] recalled being invited by the Kappa Kappa Gamma chapter at the versity ofI I accepted their invitation andI _ Z _ I Idid not remember the mechanics of how the memberlocal Kappawho Kappaor invited Gammacha ter found out that[:::]had been a The name[:::::::;:::]wasunknown to[:::] I Imaintained an active social circle while at the University ofI I I Istated thatI Ihad been very involved in getting intramu ctivities suc as volleyball games- Istudents.establisheg memberswith alsoparticipated offii:Flabin campusand otheractivities post-docs andincludingthe ThrougEI Iinvolvement,[:::]couId_havemet anynumber ofpeop G . [::::::]maintains friendship with _ Ia Kappa KappaGamma sorority sister from time at the College of FD-302a10-6-95! Rev. x 1:5 279A WF 222 936 127C ContinuationFD-3024 of I of , On1 /O O3 2/ O 7, Page -3.. [:::::]n@ntioned three'ndividua1s work who atthe '0 Institutes of alt iQ_Bethe§Qg, Marvland who were The original nondisclosure agreement and interview notes are contained in corresponding 1A! ALI. FEIPJUITIDIII CUIJTELI1-IED 36 6' HE IS UIiICLi*i55IFIEIIi FD-302 Rev.10-6-95 ! D11 l2 l[l §.'CllIlEiEIIIBE4 ]§i" i" UCEii@iIiI; F15_,~"LSC Ll; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date oftranscription 1 Q 4 15 Z 2 Q Q '7 GRAND JURY MATERIAL - DISSEMINATE PURSUANT TO RULE 6 e! Pursuant to a Grand Jury Subpoena issued in the United States District Court District o ' GJ 6-01 #5616!, Postal lnspector[:::::::::::::] received on October 15, 2007. b3 b6 b7C b6 b7C After being advised of the identity of the interviewer, [::::::::]provided the following additional information: / The recordsprovided to Postal Inspecto Fave been enclosed in an associated 1A envelope. b6 b7C Investigation on 1 O/ l 5 / 2 O O'7 File 279A WF 222936-BEI# -9 om dictatedn/a This documentcontains neitherrecon-imendations conclusions nor the of FBI.It is the propertyof th it and its contentsare not to be distributed outside youragency. All I FEELLTIIIIIJ CUNTAII-TED HERB | T_TI'Il:Li155IFIEIJ FD-1023 Rm/_5.22-2097! DATE 0 Q J.El 2E DB BY EIIIEEQ LTEB11I~.T; P.S; L5E C FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: 10/ll/2007 Case ID:v§§;A WF 222936 BEI _ b2 Pending!»/QD Contact Date: 10/09/2007 Type of Contact: Telephonic Location: I I b6 Written by:Special Agent[::::::::::::::] b7C Other s! Present: N/A Source Reporting: CHS, who is in a position to testify, telephonically contacted writer on the evening of 10/09/2007 and provided the following information: nited Sates Army Medical Research Institute of BRQQElgiéyiinusipiseases LyINS'sbehavior USAMRIID!,_Fort today was "freaky." Detrick [JMaryland, 3 em loyee b6 b7C is routine,set up andlabeled tubesthe beforehand;|however,IVINS, per once the mistake was realized told[:::]"I don't knowwho madethe b'7D mistake" me or you.[::::]found this incredulous as all of the tubes were labeled in IVINS s own handwriting, so clearly IVINS made the mistake. IIVINS could not reset his password to something and his password would be sent to him by regular mail. This upset IVINS to the point he declared, "I need tocomputer!"iiiUmiopined stand h 'th a bat to makemeant IVINS sure no someone onehad logs accessed onto my his computer. S [:::::::::::::]this behavior capped ofsome previous unusual eventspertaining toIVINS. noted t2§;*Fn_gr_abFut V _.. .0 o I07 ¬ L 9 Q ' CHS Reporting 279A WF 222936 BEI Pending!, 10/09/2007 b6 1376 177D | loverheard IVINS discussinghe had taken Ambien P! and had wriktena bizarre email[:::§:::::] I IVINS indicate to one co- worker that he sent the email from his residence, and later to another co-worker indicated he had come into USAMRIID in such a state and sent the email. refrigerator/freezer[::::::::::]reiterated IVINS B313 in recent wasnot cleana planned out ofor hisscheduledl event. l recalled,0' after cleaning, IVINS autoclaved: serial dilutions of I Bacillusnolabelin . agtfragis, dilution blanks,and largera flaskwhich had | |was absolutelv certain IVINS used writer's namein conversation.| I 2 l______CHS Reporting b6 279A WF 222936-BEI Pending!, 10/09/2007 b7@ b7D I LYINSindicate ' ering I told IVINS that they hadland observe that? the E l leaving edzly one had morning. IVINS indicated he put one and one together and ' surmised that the writer has been obtaining the USAMRIID security/surveillance tapes. | A | cns greed to contact writer with additional information. Q0 3 '. ' Q a ILIFEIPMTIUEICUIITAIIJED _ -Elm IS UNCLASSIFIED FDJ°23 R 6Q2Q°°n DATE 12-29-zana BY50324 uc FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 1:131-Ifrs Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: 10/10/2007 Case ID: Pending!-/QJ b2 Pending! b7D Contact Date: 10/O8/2007 Type of Contact: Telephonic Location: I I b6 Written by:Special Agent[::::::::::::::] b7C Other s! Present: N/A Source Reporting: Individual, who is not in a position to testify, b6 b7C O1"l 1 provided the following information telephonically to writer 137D the afternoon of 10/08/2007: 2 if 4, 1, 36 Dr C U b3 CHS Reporting b6 279A WF 222936 BEI Pending!, 10/08/2007 b7C b7D | BRUCE was querie Jsomething to the effect of, "So who do you thinkmain did this?" BRUCE IVINS indicated he could not name names but identified that some one who lives in New Jersey, and who works for a p armaceuh t' ica company l was a p tthe to of his list . It was clear to all that BRUCE IVINS was referring to former USAMRIID employee BRUCE IVINS advised what convinced him that was e acthad indeedthatelderly mailed the female victim anthrax lac 'n andEf:if2Efff:j 2001mother resided in the same square mile in Connecticut. IVINS further indicated he conducted his own computer research to reach that 3 CHS Reporting 279A WF 222936 BEI Pending!, 10/O8/2007 b6 b7C b7D conclusion.[:::::]challenged IVINSon his theory asking somethingIVINS replied,the "to ." effect of [:::f:]immediate "Whwould E:::;::::] thatdo it?" did BRUCE not make anysense. Efifff continuedhow couLiEii¬?Ef§hhave foreseen the impact, such as the polygraphs and investi ations, that the USAMRIIDIVINS, "Whywouldn't employeeswouldof mailed havehegone one throutofh?| |qgeried FRUCE ' IVINS h h d ' l ' ' a distant, w o seconda previous to[::::f:::] indicated replied, his unnamed "He's at secondthetop choice of my was list. I didn't say I'd bet the farm on it." p brought up Alsofq I name; however, there was no further discourse pertaining to[:::::::]possibly bein the perpetrator of - ' ' Qf 2991 by] l | b3 I BRUCEIVINS mentionedthat ' had to be one of the world's experts on spore preps, and b7D he was "proud" of[:::]work. BRUCE IVINS also indicated that "they" had looked at the spores used in the attacks nd , a t ah hat the spores had im p rovedq with subse uen t lings. mai ' opined this meantthey that under saw the "purity"microscope[p a of s ores had improved basedI upon what I b7Cbg b7D E::::::]threw out the possibility that possibly two different sources could account for the differences in the purity.[:::::::::::] recalled,[::::::]or BRUCE IVINS,responded 4 . Q 8 I D CHS Reporting 279A WF 222936-BEI Pending!, 10/O8/2007 b5 something to the effect that those kind of conspiracies are 137C really hard to'keep secret. 1:713 WFO NOTE: enclosed in the FD 34O associated with the [::::] part of this file are CHS's electronicnotes pertaining to b2 b7D 5 ~ CHS Reporting 279A WF 222936 BEI Pending!, 10/O8/2007 CHS's observations and recollections of the events that CHS had additionally provided to writer as instructed.! 00 6 , . ~'2 1 x 1K ALL I J i4 -.TIII1I~i C|I1I~JTAI]i1'EI;~ HEFEI J UHELAESIFIED FD4°2@ W-"699 Dirt l2~lU 2BU¬ Br 50324 rc BAHfH3fLSE -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION be Date oftranscription 9O f 2 6 Z 2OO7 1379 En I N lmet with I BRUCEofInfectious ED, 5 IVINS_of Diseases the USAMRIIDL, U.S. Army Military Research at| Institute L I ~f§ The following conversation took place: 92 [:::::::;]asked IVINSwhy hehad a black eye. IVINS stated that he ran into something, then he joked that it was his wife s fist. IVINS denied alcohol being involved in the incident and added that he thought he got it while he was sleeping. He explained that his side table is close to his bed and he may have rolled over and hit it. midnight,[::::::::]thenprevious the asked IVINS sendingf:::]emails.[:;::]askednight, whhe wasat work around him if he thought that puts up a big red flag [to inves igators]. IVINS said that when he started working extra long and hard it wasn't viewed as evil or suspicious. At times, he would go to work to get away from his 8' Additionally, IVINS stated that he walked to work last night and then home around l AM. He explained that he took an Ambien and then walked home and by that time he was zonked and didn't wake up until the morning. [::;::::;::f%%é;:]VINS informai[::::::]thata trailer setting up heoff post, hadsuggested a place at thenotidea c ose o a ropolitan area, and utilizing a fermenter to grow Ames spores. According to IVINS, he came up with this idea because Dugway jProving Grounds] can't meet their demands. to be IVINS more discre informedE;:::;;1that e an ess tauntingpeople to thetelling[i¥;:] FBI.were F r examp e,[::]is sending pictures, via email, of powderedsugar mwwwmnw O9/25/2007 m Fredereck, MD File'# 279A WF 222936 BEI.. /Q9 Date dictatedN/A I SA by PI This documentcontains neitherrecommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. Itis theproperty the of FBIand is loaned to your agency; it and its contentsare notto be distributed outsideyour agency. A 1 6 0 FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A~WF 222936 BEI b5 b7 C Continuation ofFD-302of BRUCE EDWARDS IVINS , On O 9/2 5 /2 O O7 , Page donuts.supposedrepresent o[;::::::] later explained anthraxspores.][::::¬:::]toldthat theowdered IVINSis thatsugar [::; ybelieved that to be in extremel t ast de an oor j gu ement; pp andit is alsoa arent t Io I t hat I I directing it at IVINS. I I IVINSreplied fha§II I thou ht it was very funny. Although, id get a te for sending the New Jersey letter. According to IVINS, had also taken Tupperware to a boyscoutting trip so tha cou be photographed wading in a pond and picking it up out o the water. Associated with the tupperware are the words: "genuine FBI trap." Additionally, IVINS claimed that used these photos in an institute wide presentation, whic itled: "Use of the underground biological facility in the West Virginia Mountains". IVINS stated that he didn't want to become the "Richard Jewell" of USAMRIID simply because he would provide an excuse for everybody. He doesn't look at himself as a killer or a terrorist. He admits he is sloppy and his big fear is that something will have to be done, so it will be said that IVINS was negligent. IVINS believed that being negligent with Federal property would put him in jail for five to ten years. He then gave an example of being negligent with Federal property: as leaving keys in a government car, and somebody stealing such and robbing a bank. it IVINS toldI Ithat he thought it was unfair I I He said he could think of a handful of people who were mean enou h to do it for smart enoug. to pull it off92 }kathen named:[:%::::::::::::] only and withI I and IVINS thensaid thatthe thingthat getshim isthat if a closeness or probability study was done, lived close' elatifveli to the woman in Connecticut lived that all died. Where as which is not a huge metropolis. informed IVINS that was having problems withrecently compu er purchased.and IVINS asked him whatrepliedthat inhe of had computer bought hea hadDell with Windows XP, one or two years ago. Also, he was looking for a recycling place to take the old computer off their hands h.,,, - x FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! b6 b7C 279A WF 222936-BEI Continuation ofFD-302of BRUCE EDWARDS IVINS , On0 9/ 2 5 / 2 0 07 , Page -3- IVINS told[:::::::]that after the FBI interviews someone, everybody [at USAMRIID] goes around and asks about what th FBI had to say. According to IVINS, the FBI asked|:| about his handwriting on a prep versus his handwriting som were else. [:::::] replied this was because hewas getting everybody everything. According to IVINS, the FB twp olvgraphs and they ' I Hpthat the IIVINS FBI told| |that they found spores in one of the said ' fermentors. IVINS believed this to be one of[::::::::] old fermentors. . IVINS is looking forward to his retirement, in the end ofsacrifice. the 2008 fiscal Heis still y ear. liticalHe working doesn't wantbecause ofi ineed for ' ' medical carer__CnrrfntlyH | IVINShas suggested to that | Currently, IVINSpaysl i 1;, I " ALL I nnrrnn CUHTAINED HEREI UHELASSIFIED FD402 R #1@6@5! DATE 12-in-zuun st nusza uu simrssytac "L" FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION b5 b7f; Date oftranscription 1 Q Z 1'72 O O Z '7 92 was atinte viewedon September 6, I is a| |whose office telephone'ned subject number is thatED BRUCE IVINSD Priorbe investigatioa p$tfipf:ff;¥Eif::]to Eiiiifii practice . At the*concIusi O * o f o h t at intervie was hadasked to beenheld confirm that whetherduringa specific or notperiod Mondaytime group of in therap2001.f:ifi :i:i] ' stated that he was unsure if he had records or a calendar avai a e to provide this information. However, he agreed to review his records and provide the requested information if available. As of October 12,2007,[:::::::] had not responded to the request for this informa ' . An official written re uest for [%;:::]information w Specifically,a s xedfa t o wasat askedtelephone number E;:::::::::]to confirm whet eror not e held group therapy sessions on Mondays from August 6, 2001 through October 29, 2001. On October13, 2007, a faxed response froni[::::::::]was received at the Amerithrax Task Force Frederick Offsite office. The faxed reply of[:::::::]did not adequately comply with the request for information. A copy of the faxed request for information andthe faxedresponse of[::::::::]areattached. Im%@mbnm 10/13/2007 m Frederick, Maryland Fiie# 279A WF-222936 BEI- LQZ Date dictatedn/a by J:| Postal Inspector Thisit documentitsandcontains arecontents neithertorecommendationsdistributed notbe your conclusionsnor ofthe FBI.agency. It is outsidethe propertyof the FBI and| is loaned to youra encg Y ' _Z-i._ - I , I I IND. XMTJE!l'l_ >K>k>k>k>!<>K>K>k>K>K>l<>K>K>K>K>KDFITE UCT 12@'?>!<>1 DQTE/TIME OCT-12-288'? 13524 ALL II~IFElP!I-I&TIElI~I CUITTAIIJTED HERE Ila]IS UEICLAS S IFIEZI IOURNHL N0. @ ? DATE 3.2-ll] ZIJUB B1" 58324 LTII BAIL"R5£'L5E COMM. RESULT OK PQGECSJ 881/881 DURQTION 88188119 FILE N0. 751 Q6 MODE MEMORY TRQNSMISSION 973 DESTINQTION T: RECEIUED ID 92RESOLUTION STD >K>i<>R>K>K>k>R>K>l<>l<>l<=i<>|<>K>iOi<>i<>i<>k>K>i<>i<>l<>I<>K>i<>l<>l<>i<>i<>i<>I<>!<>K>l<>l< >R>{<>{<>i<>K- >i<>i<>l<>I<>K>l<>i<>i<>i< I ALL FE -TFOnitrrtnu.- r:n1-rmtuau HEIRZIP LTEIIILAESIFI ED DATE l2 lU 2ElElEi BY 60324 UE . e;tu,:n;'s,*L:=c ,,.>..," Fr £9 .,__ 0 - * * _ UNITED STATESP0 STAL|NSPECT|0N SERVICE 11O él "A " WASHING T Q N DIVISION .1, I '5Q: -9p5¢92-92"'-n...---"'.~* _. 1:6 197C October 12, 2007 I 5 De=|:| Pursuant t o an of cial investigation this service is requesting' the following Y infonnationregard ing the occurrenceof group therapysessions atyour of ce in 2001. Speci cally, p lease con rm that group therapysessions were held on the following dates please provide the beginnmg' andend times of each session!: ugust 6,2 00 1 August 1;," 2001 August 20,2001 August 27, 2001 September 3,2001 September10, 2001 September 17, 2001 September 24,2001 October 1, 2001 October 8, 2001 October 15, 2001 October 22,2001 October 29, 2001 This inform ation may be madeavailable for pickup or mailedto Posta lmspecto U.S. Postal InspectionServ ice, 10500Little Patuxent Pkwy., Suite 200 Columbia,' MD21044-3509. The re uested infonnation may alsobe faxedto telephone number You may contact me f you require 111' formation.further Your cooperationis appreciated. Sincerely, Postal Inspector WASHINGTONDIVISION 10500 LITTLEPATUXEN T PARKWAY COLUMBIA, 21044-3509MD . 0¢f-il?r3-01 ____2D _l , L No. 3862 P.2 il ALL IZIIQKTIDIICEIIITAII-IEI3 b6 ~-~ i* i ¬|';T**'_*.1-'.:- HEREIEL n IR-TELASSIFIED b7C ,_.,.....» :--;'»~';§x DATE l.2 lEl 2UEiB BY 6Cl32=11UII BM].r H5 :"L SE -is . ~>».- :-.»,- ..: £i'.-7 PSYCHIATRY CENTER or FREDERIC Octo ber 13, 2007 Dear I reviewedmy recordsand was I leadinga group on Mondayafternoons the in spring and summ er of2001. Asthe recordsare overfour yearsold haveI notretained them,and thebilling . we ram forthat time period crashed.is led the I group weekly,and generallyI takeoff 2-3 weeks in late A ugust. apologizeI fornot havingmore speci cinformation. Sine erely, 4 El s ~ - _ gar ~ 1. b';,,ér_"5 A ALI. HERE Iii!-LQTI 5 UNCLASSIFIEDCUNTAII-JED cm: DATE Z.2 lEl 2lIiIIi-E BY 60324 TIC BMJ.~"P.5,"LSE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: 10/02/2007 Case ID #= 279A WF 222936 BEI pendingt-A17 b2 I I Pending! b7D Contact Date: 10/01/2007 Type of Contact: Telephonic b6 Location:I I b7C Writer: SpecialAgent[::::::::::::] Witness es!: N/A Source Reporting: CHS, who is in a position to testify, telephonically provided the following information on the evening of 10/01/2007: Qnited State ,Army_Medical Research_Ins 'tuteof b6 Infectious Diseases US MRIID!, Fort Detr' I BRUCE 12153 was "down an out last week opined IVINS's depressed mood stemmed from discussions b"/C with IVINS. IVINSpertained to. It was unknown to It was CHSunknown as to whatas iscussions o why[::::::;:]b"/D continually sought to agitate IVINS and to get IVINS into worrie and excitable state. . mood. AsIVINS of relayedtf:::ii:jwasMonda 10 01 2007, IVINS of townout was in and a much hehad better an enjoyable weekend. IVINS slept in, made muffins, and also bought a movie. IVINS simply talked on and on about his weekend. 7 It was CHS'sunderstanding that USAMRIIDI I I Ispoke to thd Iinstruct people thein His divisioJ to keep quiet pertaining to alleged Federal Bureau of Investigation activity on Veteran's Day 2006 prior to the Bacteriology Division Christmasshocked"[j%::ji:::]told art held in 12/2006. CHSabout IVINS opined atit thatthe 12/2006 was why "we Christmas were b6 party b7C Q 2 92 1 ELL 1ni]U1,TIClI-I EIENTAIIUED FD-S02 Rev_10 6 95! HEREIN IS LWCLASSIFIED 92 DATE l3~lU 2ElEl3 Ff I'5IJ532¢i1 ZTC BAH.»- P.5i* LEC -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION b 6 b 7 C . Date of transcription 1 O Z2 5 l 2 O Q'7 I | I |soci.a.l da_te_o.f_bj_ni'.b.| residing at hometele hone number| rcellular telephone number was interviewed at] | y _ Iprovided ' with residence at| I After being advised of the identity of the postaIT1nspectors, the purpose ' terview and comp let" - ing a non disclosure " agreement, ififffjfi provided " the following information: Cincinnati. earned earned his| his Iin k 6.1; the Ll ffrsit ofatl | Universitv in | lwhere I He went to work VIA at , then on to I the] I i I | _ land] is currently employed inl linl | While| learned hisi l in | i at'the niversity of Cincinnati,| Iknew and was friendly with BRUCE another student earning his masters or Ph. D at the universi . i Idescribed IVINS as an athletic and entertaining guy with a good sense of humor who[:::::::]said "never saw him IVINS! get angry." - [:::::::]recounted a humorous event of which[::]had heard 3 of secondhand, but later confirmed with IVINS. In the event, IVINS was defending his thesis or dissertation to the evaluating professors. Before any questions could be asked, IVINS removes a gun or starter pistol from his bag or briefcase and lays it on the table, and then asks the evaluators something to the effect of "got any questions?" The incident was taken by all to be a joke, as IVINS reputation throughout the department was that of a jokester. ¢ investigation on l O /2 5 /2 O O '7 _} File# 2'79A WF 222936 BEI -' /,;L5 Datedictated 10/25/2007 Postal Ins P ector by N8 Postal Inspector This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It ls the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency. ' ' 5 Q FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! b6 b'7C 279A- WF 222936 BEI Continuationof FD-302of I I , OnO / 12 5 / 2O '7 OPagc ,2 stated that[;:1wasborn and raised in I IVINSHe familyprior to graduate stated t aschool. [:1 ha met E:Effii] statedor known that[::]last the hadinteracted been withat microbiology IVINS at graduateconferenceTE??i::j s ut thoughthave attended perhaps may years IVINS earlier. [:::::::]never recalled IVINS speakingbadly of an one. H LknswIIINS SQQiQllI_Lh£QHQh_ §Q§£Lm§nL_DQ£Li§ rl: OurI hadsocialbeen closecircles werefriends totally different" with[:::::::::] butwhoH:::::::jrecalled thought IVINShad had a foot race on the school's track with IVINS to see who was faster. I Ididn't recall IVINSbeing in a fraternity. I Iimpression of IVINS was that he was "goofy" and liked to kid around. thought that a lot of people did not take IVINS seriously. found IVINS to be "extraordinarily bright." [:::::::] could not remember IVINS "being violent or expressing violence." [:::::::] perceived IVINS "as being a very sensitive person." B otherwise,E:::::::]did where[;:]was not rememberforced to strip any incident, naked hazingandroll orin the floor in a mixture of o ive oil and human waste. He did not remember hearing of anyone else having to partake in such an activity. [;;::::::]additionallythat recalled pledgeswere tosent Over the ine, a very poor and dangerous neighborhood in Cincinnati to collect donations for City of Hope. [::::::::]remembered whileat college, an incident where some girls claimed that they were taken advantage of. Officials th httht|oug a I were" invo 1ve ecausedb t he girls described a fraternity pin similar The charges were unsubstiated and went away. learned of the incident 5 0 FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 8 b6 Io7C 279A WF- 222936 BEI I Continuationof FD-302of _| I , On1 / O25 / 2O '7 O Pagc , J- through| land did not know if the girls were associated to a sorority. I lthouqht that Kappa Kapp; Gamma may havebeen the sororit it."housel E:fja1so stated that the Kappa Kappa dibutmma "wouldn't sororityhadswear very to attractive members. [:::::::]cou1d remember taking a trip to New Jerseyto attendfrom school meetings but couldn'tin Atlantic remember City.[:::]nmy'have who withor what gone with degreeE::Fwaseo le p pursuing at the time. did not know or remember any of the following 1 |;| individuals: The terms Greendale and Jimmy Flathead had no meaning to I Icould not remember any stories of a Greek organization's ritual book being stolen while at the University of Cincinnati.| Reviewing IVIN'shigh school photo,[::::::] confirmed it was the IVINS[::]knew, but did not recall IVINS wearingglasses nor having his hair combed which[:::::::]described as always being messed up. _ The interview notes and non-disclosure agreements are included in the accompanying 1A! ______> er FD-1023 Rev.6-22-2007! F1EIJlEIil92L.l3llFIEU92lJ IF:IlI92IlES?T1 lN11 JIl Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document ALL INFDFLI-LXTICII-ICElILTTAII~IEII-I ReP°rtinq Datei 10/25/2007 EEHHMISUHUA%INED Case ID: 279A WF 222936~BEI Pending!-/QL;DWE1229h b3 EEIEIB BY E0324 uc }:1nnI*:_3 Contact Date: 10/18/2007 Type of Contact: Telephonic Location: I I 106 Written by:Special Agent[:::::::::::]J 1:173 Other s! Present: N/A Source Reporting: l Individual, who is not in a position to testify, telephonically provided the following information: QniL§dlStates Army Medical Research Institute of _D1se_a§sas USAMI -e §d_a_ndI b6 I iindicatedl ihad ecently spoken to fellow Bacteriology92Division employee, B NS. IVINS purportedlyconfided toE::::]that when IVINSh d bl/ C appeared before the Grand Jury in Washington, D.C., he IVINS! had "laid it all out" to the Grand J y pertainin to wh h e h 107]! l perpetrated IVINS! the anthrax lacedformerthought letter USAMRIIDemp m 'l1ngs had% 0 . 00 : I 0 ALL TIEIREIIII IHQTIDEI W T,TIJlILi&§'3EIFIED :i:iI92]TQII'IED DATE l2 lEl 2DDEi 3'2 6032-11TIE BAH.-"R5?.; L3E - - 36 BEI I /957 be l On August30, 2007SAI effected a CARFAX Vehicle Histor Re ort on a| i I VIN:| |previoq§ly ' o in attempt to ascertain the c urrent' location of said vehicle. ' this vehicleAccordingwas to lastregistered the attached three on| page I CARFAX in| repor N ofat the 01/22/2007, Motor Vehiclethis ' Department,d vehicle was| Fre eriI , ck Marylan , an as |:| ' ALL INF TIIIJN IIIIIIITZLII-1'.EII< HEREIN IELASSIFIED DATE l2 llII~2l3l3E? El" EH32-11 UE E.$LT:.T;'Pi5_.-"L5II Automated Serial Permanent Charge-Out FD 5a 5 94! Date: O2/O5/O8 Time: 07:29 Case ID: 279A-WF-222936 BEI Serial: 128 b6 Description of Document: b7C Type = FD302 Date = 11/01/07 To = WASHINGTON FIELD From = WASHINGTON FIELD Topic| INTERVIEW oF 11/1/2007 Reason for Permanent Charge-Out: serial transferred to subfile cp at request ofsa [:::::::] _Transferred to: Case ID: 279A WF 222936 CP Serial: 2 l / L_._____?i I11 ~= ALL IIil0_SiTIDI1Z CBI1IT§iII=IEI3 FD_3O2 Rev10_6_95! HERETFI TS TI'l iTI'II.Jl1 il"i1'F T}?".TJ I DATE l2 lEl E2DDE BY UC BJlIiT,.* 33,- L$C -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date oftranscription ]_ 1 [ O 6 Z2 OO 7 on November6, 2007, SA|:| and S1-92|:| 105 [;:;::;:;::] revieweditem #60 box #7, labeledas TrilobiteHigh b -_v/~ c oo earbooks. The box contained five yearbooks from the Iv following years: 1957, 1961, 1962, 1963, and 1964. The review of evidence began at approximately 10:30am and ended at approximately 1:20pm. "The Trilobite" is the name of the yearbook for Lebanon [:i;ff:§f ' ool burgundy inis Lebanon, Ohio.white The and 1964 Brucewith yearbook, Ivins'signaturereviewed by onSA e second page. There were a total of 123 pages in the book. The 1961 yearbook, reviewedby SA[::::::] is yellow with brown lettering. Ivins' freshman year picture is on page 46 and there are a total of 119 pages in the book. The 1962yearbook, reviewedby SA.[:::::] is burgundy with white lettering. There are two-white diamonds with 1962 written in outline letters on the diamonds. There are a total of 118 pages in the yearbook. [wifh:f]burgundyThe 1957yearbook, pictureof a building reviewed byon the SAt[::::::]is cover. Thisyellow isthe yearbook for[::::::::::] However, it has the initials B.I. on the inside front and rear covers. The yearbook does not Ihave |picture page numbers. There is a atfingerprintthe top and[::::::f:f:::::::]on the a e with picture at the bottom. In the organizations section, there are arrows drawn in pencil to several pictures. The organizations withTeachers arrows America, aboveof the picture Bi Le Hi are: and Pep StudentClub. Council, Pictures FutofTff::] [:::g::]can befound underBe-Li-Hi, ClassPlay, HonorSociety, an SEO The 1963 yearbook, reviewedby SAs[::::::] and[::::::] is a blue book with green writing. Bruce Ivins' name is located on page one and there are a total of 119 pages. hwwgmnm 11/6/2007 at Falls Church, Virginia FiIe# 279A WF 222936- BEI LQ9 oatedaared 11/6/2007 SA by SAI . | / This document contains neitherrecommendations conclusionsnor ofthe FBI. It is the propertyof the FBI andis loaned to youragency; it and its contentsare notto be distributed outsideyour agency. |:| _ ; x -| 6 HERE ALL IMF IN -IETIDE LUHTAINEDLJZHSIFIEIII DZITE LE lU "lI|lIlEi EIY lit -K1334}UC BME,-"RS_."L5C FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Confidential Human Source CHS! Reporting Document Reporting Date: 10/19/2007 Case #:i69A WF-222936 BEIID Pending!-i?>Q | | Pending! b7D Contact Date: 10/19/2007 Type of Contact: In Person E6 vc Location:| I Writer: SAI Witness es!= SA Source Reortin = On 10/19/2007, S and met with CI-IS person,in whoprovided the following information: b b -3 1:7 Greetings, ' 7C D I hadn't been to [sic] active for a while on the Kappa [Wikipedia] page, but I was catching up a bit last week with some edits. Since the major overhaul to the Notable Kappas,I noticed[::::::::::::::] has been removed again. I think it's a shame that the notable list is biased towards celebrities, but it's a valid point that all thin g pags on the e sh ou e ld b sourced. Do you by chance know of any journals or news a er articles that might Kappa?referencdm mmmmiggb involvement Were you a e to get in touch with with b7f:b6 p 36 F !7 IQ IVINS replied with the following email on 10/09/2007 0 ¢ Hi! I saw your additions and comments to the KKG age I was disappointed when IG removed seems to be a Czarina of GLO pages I also appreciate your straightening things out with respect to "no public' 0' motto " Sometimes' or things blur, as in an organization's colors, j ,ewel or fl w o er, versus i t t smo to, i d ea ls, etc I tho htug a th t K appath was e on l y source to settle this issue. I would probably have to go back to t earl and mid-1970s to see mention of and Kappa, either as pledge, active member, or chapter adviser. I would think that [KKG] Headquarters in Columbus would have the information, but I don't know if that would be considered a "public source." I'm really not "anti Kappa," as it probably seemed earlier. KKG has set very high goals for itself and its members, and what looks bad for Kappa may not cause an eye blink from another GLO. When I was in undergraduate and graduate school, I think the thing that most impressed me with members of KKG was their intelligence. They were invariably fine looking, had great personalities, were vary [sic] active leaders in the campus community, and were extraordinarily intelligent. Since I admire people who can think, I held Kappas in very high regard, with a bit of envy as well! 2 b6 b7C b7D I did write| and |didn't object to the inclusion. 1S a brilliant, kind] Iwho as devoted I] I |to| Iand If to| [KKG's] | Columbus Headquarters can provid E:f::¬::::]canro er information, thenbere included. perhaps I want to apologize again for trying to contact you through your work email. If you're from the Pittsburgh area originally, you may be quite a follower of the Pirates, Steelers and Penguins. Golfer Arnold Palmer was raised not far from Pittsburgh, I believe. Enjoy the fall! I hope that[::::::::::::] canli t.be I readdedalso [sic]know toanother the Kappa,[:::::ff:] Notable Ka as E::%:::::::::::] an alumna Williamof and Mary, who is a noted virologist. JF bruce ivins! 92 "1 The originalprintouts [::::::::::]withof IVINS are contained in a 1A envelope. Q0 3 4 * L~11? , 6 HEREIBI ALL INF TIUN ICLLSSIFIED CONTAINED pD302gmw_uy@93 ' DATE 12 10-2000BY 0000400 BAOrnsrL00 _ 1 - FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Dateof transcription ll Z O 9[ 2 O O'7 b6 issued byU.S.On November Magistrate 2, 2007,Judge pursuant Deborah¥A. to Robinson,a Search Warrant rict' of bf/C Columbia, a search was conducted of saf deposit box located at 1305ENC WestBank 7th Street, formerly Frederick,Earmers Maryla d. Theand_Mecha§;csBank, above listed Branchr llly safe de osit box is rented by BRUCE E. IxINS[ i Iroii FBIW .Special Agents_ '_ participatedjinthe _, Ehe .1search: following At approximately 9:00 a.m., Special Agents[:::::::]and [::::::]arrived at PNC Bank andentered thebusiness. Shortly after arrivinq,SAs| éndil cl madecontact with I L Financia Sa es, onsu1tantL_and advised her of the existence ofa search warrantfor safe deposit box:[::] SA presented with a co of the search warrant. informed SAs and that the bank's assistant branch manager, was en route to the bank in order to assist wit t e execution of the warrant. At 1 a roximate y 9:37 a.m., Sis Iii and| lmet | withiadvised| Assistant |of the Branch M existenciaof nagera forsearch PNCwarrant Ban , SA for safe deposit box After reviewing a copy of a search warrant and contacting PNC Bank's Loss Prevention Office, E::::::jaccessed the bank vaultcontaining safe deposit boxes. accompaniedAt a roximately 10:00byf?::::::%:fnEffTdthe a.m., SAs|vault. Prior to iandi Iexecuting the search warrant, SA took photographs of the vault and safe deposit box. With the assistance of| | SQ | opened the safe deposit box. The box was moved to a counter located outside of the vault in order to inventory the contents of the safe deposit box. S mwwwmnm 11/O2/2007 at Frederick, Maryland File# 279A WF 222936 BEI - /3/ , Date dictated N/A b6 ' SA b7C by SA This documentcontains neitherrecommendations conclusionsnor theof FBI. It is the propertyof the FBI andis loanedto youragency; it and its contentsare notto be distributed outsideyour agency. I I 1 I BACK OF PAGE 144 b6 107$ K 0 0 FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 BEI ContinuationF_D-302 of of , Onl 1 / O2 / 2 O O7 , Page _2_ The safe deposit box contained five items. They are b6 listed as follows: bf/C 1! One ! white legal envelope which read "#2, Savinqs Bonds, 3/96-7/99." containinq| | 2! LbneCD w ite legal envelope which read "#3, Savings Bo _ ll containin 3! One ll! white legal envelope which read "#4, Savings Bonds Dec 2002," containing] | 4! One !white legal envelope w ichread "ConLract Bricken," containing a copy of a contract for legal representation 5!| All of the items were documented and photographed. All photographs and documentation pertaining to the search were 1 enclosed in an FD-340 in the 1A section of the case file. None of the above listed items were seized during the search. The search concluded at approximately 10:27 a.m. on November 2, 2007. At the conclusion of the search, a copy of the search warrant was placed inside the safe deposit box. Afterward, the safe deposit box was returned to the bank vault. Prior to closing the safe deposit box, SA[::::::]took exit photographssafe deposit of box the bank locked, was vault and safe depos' SAs[:::::::]andTf:?if:]exited After the the [:::::i::]vault The SA.E:::::iasafe de osit released box was subsequentlythekeyto safe re depositeased to box{::::] PNC Bank, 1305 West 7th Street, Frederick, Maryland, to Supervisory PostalInspector SPI![:::::::::::::::]at 9:01 a.m. on November 9, 2007. 11" . Xv Q ALL HEREININQATIIIIIJ D UNCLASSIFIEDIIIIIIIITAII-IEI; FD-302 Rev. 10-6-95! . /- DATE lZ lEl .:2UEii3 B? GU-32%UII BA'uI..*E!.S; L;-¬E "L FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 106 b /C Date of transcription 1 1 I O 6 I 2 O O '7 On November 1, 2007, pursuant to a Search Warrant _ issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah A Robinson, District of Columbia, a search was conducted of a 1993 Honda Civic four rdQor_sedan__hii:iTgvehicle registered identification umberto BRUCE EDW S IVINS1 FBICQUL Special Agent I was responsible for the transport of the vehicle to be searched. A a roximately 7:54 p.m., SAI Imet with SA [;::;::::;::f::fiat re eric , Mary and. the SAI:I residence provided located at SAwith one keyI belonging to the above listed vehicle. The vehicle, a Honda Civic bearing Maryland license plates was parked on the II of streetthe vehicle infront 'I I an SAE;;;;é;5verifiednote any existingthe VIN# damage. Any existing damage was noted on a vehicle damage sheet. The vehicle damage sheet, along with a copy of the search warrant, has been enclosed in an FD-340 in the 1A section of the case file. SA[:::::::]also documented the vehicle's odometer reading as 238,920 miles. _ At transported the abovelisted vehicle from to the search site located at the Maryland.intersection SAEf:?ifi?]arrived ' Avenue at at Chandler the search Street, site Fort at7:58 p.m.Detrick, A search of the vehicle was conducted at the above listed location. The search concluded at approximately 1:06 a.m. on November 2, 2007. I At 1:06 a.m., SA[:::::::]transported the vehicle from EDWARDSthe search IVINS. site to SAI Errived ence of at the the registered residence, which owner, BRUCEis SAE7if¬:iiIdocumented lo the odometer reading of thelvehicle at 1:12 a.m as 238,922 miles. The vehicle w s arked on the street in front of the residence and locked. S released the vehicle key to Supervisor Y Postal Ins p ector < !SPI at 6:25 a.m. on November 2, 2007. Imwmwmon 11/O1/2007 at Frederick, Maryland In 6 OTC F"-.#_ 279A~WF~222936-BEI -= '/35! Datedictated N/A by SAI I This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency. ' M BACK OF PAGE 149 fr? ' ~=, V Q ALL 1'1/nrri Z11-I EDI-ITAIIIED HD802a%W_1@6@5! HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE l2 lC! 2Ci§l=3 BY E0324 ZTC BAH,- F.S_.*'LSC -1- . FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date of transcription 1 1 [ O 6 [ 2 O O '7135 bw On November 1, 2007, pursuant to a Search Warrant issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah A. obinson, District of Columbia, a search was conducted of a 2002 lue Saturn SL1 four _door sedan, bearing vehicle identification number VIN! F p l, registered to BRUCE EDW RDS IVINS. The following FBI Special Agents participated in the transport of the vehicle to be searched: SA SA C At approximately 8:10 p.m.,SA[:::g::] met with SA I | |at the search site locate at the i intersection of Ditto Avenue at Cha eet, Fort Detrick, one transparent i page Maryland.SA[:::::::::]protector containing provided one ! Sa SA1:iij:fi£withurn ve icle key, one ! Dodge vehicle key and one ! Honda vehicle key. The page protector device.also s contained one advised ! keSA thatto a steering columnthe above listed lock vehicle was par e in a lot located at 1425 Porter Street, Ft. Detrick, Maryland. At 8:35 p.m., SA[::::::] located the vehicle a blue four door sedan bearing Maryland license platest::::::] Saturnlot at 1425 Porter Street. SAg::::%;]verified the VIN # of in the ve h'ic 1 'e| I an note any existing damage. Any existing damage was noted on a vehicle damage sheet. The vehicle damage sheet, along with a copy of the search warrant, has been enclosed in an FD 340 in the 1A section of the case file. SA[:::::::]also documented the vehicle's odometer reading as 87,192 miles. I At 8:42 p.m., SA[::::::] transported the above listed vehicle from the lot at 1425 Porter Street to the search site located at the intersection of Ditto Avenue at Chandler Street, Fort Detrick, Maryland. SA.[::::::] arrived at the search site at 8:44 p.m. A search of the vehicle was conducted at the above listed location. The search concluded at approximately 1:06 a.m. on November 2, 2007. mwwwmnm 11/01/2007 at Frederick, Maryland File# A WF 222936 BE_I =~i £5 Date dictated N/A 136 b 7C ' W BACK OF PAGE 152 hm ]'"'7 *' _ _ _I>_ x K¢I92:1 1 FD-3 02a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 b¬ hm 4 Continuation of FD-302 of , On 1 1 /O 1 / 2 O O7 , Page ...'2._ At 1:06 a.m., SA[::::::] transported the vehiclefrom Detrick, thesearch Maryland. site to the SA[¬:::::Fparked arkin lot at the 1425 vehicle inPorter Street, a spaceFortand locked the vehicle. - At 3:17 a.m. on November 2, 2007,SA.[:;;:::2g transported the above listed vehicle from the par ing ot at 1425 Porter Street to the Amerithrax offsite located in Frederick, Maryland. SA[::::::] arrived at the offsite at 3:30 a.m. At 5=l1 a-m-~ 5A[::::::] transported the vehicle from ' ' ' ' . A [fff:f?ijarrived ithrax offsite at the Hiltonto the Hilton Garden Inn, Garden whichInn Frederick S located is at 7226 Corporate Court, Frederick, Maryland, at 6:18 a.m. SA [::;;:::]~doc mies. SA[f?f?Ef parked theodometer the vehicle reading in of the the lot vehicle asat the Hilton 87,202 Garden Inn and locked all vehicle doors. SA[::::%::]released all vehicle keys to Supervisory Postal Inspector SPI![::::::] E:::::::::]at 6:25 a.m. on November 2, 2007. 4 '3 . 92 - .;.5 -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION be, b 7 C Date of transcription 1 1[ O 6 [ 2 O O'7 On November 1, 2007, pursuant to a Search Warrant issued by' U ' S ' <1 Magistrate Judge Deborah A é obinson, District of r learinColumbia, Vehici a search was. conducte_ ti_ nlumber of a 1 registered to , , Cii __1--i , _n_i_. The following FBI Special searched: Agents participated92inthe transport of the vehicleto be sA SA At approximately6:30 p.m.,SA.[::::::]1net SA withij at the West 7th Street Shopping Center, Frederick, Maryland. SAE:::::] provided SA[:::::::]with one key belongingbearing to Marylandthe abovelicense listed vplatesTEiiii::] Thewas vehicle, parked in a red the vanlot in front verified the VIN # of the vehicle and noted any existing damage. Any existing amage was noted on a vehicle damage sheet. The vehicle da@age sheet, along with a copy of the search warrant, has been enhlosed in an FD 340 in the 1A section of the case file. SA[:::::::]also documented the vehicle's odometer reading as 117,194 miles. At 7:24 p.m., SA[:::::::]transported the above listed vehicle from the West 7th Street Shopping Center to the search site located at the intersection of Ditto Avenue at Chandler Street, Fort Detrick, Maryland. SA arrived at the search site at 7:33 p. . m |:| A search of the vehicle was conducted at the above >=listed location. The search concluded at approximately 1:06 a.m. on November 2, 2007. At 1:06 a.m., SA[::::::]transported thevehicle from, the s ar h ite to the residence of the registered owner,E:::::] I l SA l arrived at the residence which is located at] _ _ h1at 1:12 a.m. SA| ldocumented the odometerreading ofthe vehicleas the11 , residence miles. Theand vehiclelocked. was SA[::E::::]released arked on the street vehicle the in front key of Iwsmmmon ll/01/2007 at Frederick, Maryland File# 2 7 -W.F'-7 7-?Q35 -BEI" i M Date dictatedN/A S b6 W S l b7C This document containsneither recommendationsnor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property ofthe FBIand is loaned toyour agency; it and its contentsare notto be distributed outsideyour agency. C C * BACK OF PAGE 157 b6 137$ _''92.1J it FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! b6 2'79A WF-222936-BEI 197$ ContinuationFD-302 of of , On 1 1 / O1 / 2 OO 7 , Page -2- to SupervisoryPostal Inspector SPI! at 6:25 a.m. on November 2, 2007. F_JJ !?N3" __ Db1 6 1 EG _ %_ FQ 0 K C .A B9292%%9292929292x$92%§$929292 C,0 Iibb _®®9292$%92_92£92§_92~929292929292§§929292 _ 0 0 P BACK OF PAGE 190 " b6 b7C CCU _/ _b G b_ NV ®9292M92¥_°92$9292§ 9292§ ALL DEHATIDIII EDI-ITAIHED HEP! S UNIILASSIFIEIII Rev_ _31-2 ! ! DATE 2 lCI 2DEl?3 BY I':'-|I3Z¢1UC B1?iII?:"R5_."L5C F1E[IE l92L.E3lJIlE llJ CJF=IIl92HE§511 ilNT1 !Il _ b 6 Precedence: ROUTINE Date: 11/13/2007 b7C To: WashingtonField Attn: |ECC/NVRA From: Washington Field Squad AMX-2 Contact =sA| I Approved Byzi I Drafted IBy: | Case ID #= 279A~WF 222936 EVIDENCE Pending%wQ3§Z 279A WF 222936 BEI Pending!v _/3-7 321A WF A226437-G1 Pending!_ /37¢ Title: AMERITHRAX MAJOR CASE 184 Synopsis: To document disposition of 1B4355 Barcode EO2l82555. Reference: 279A WF 222936 BEI Serial 131 b6 b7C Details: On 11 09 2007, at 11:45AM, PI[::::::::::::::::]and , SA returned lB4355 Barcode EO2l82555, a Red EnvelopePersonal La Assistant e e Sato[::¬::::::] e De osit Box acting Key, to[:::::::::::::::] council forBRUCE EDWARDS IVINS, one Church Street, Suite 500, Rockville, Maryland. Evidence was originally seized at 2:25AM on 11/O2/2007, by SSA] i pursuant to a search warrant for United States Army Medical Institute of Infectious Diseases Building 1425, Office 19, at 1425 Po et. The original FD 597 Release of Property signed by is maintained in the FD 34O section of the file, Seria 1A 7507. 66 1:-6 b'7C C67 92bb/_All Sg &N§929292 _ Q'9292§ Cb7 Vbb3 i92 %92 §§wm92x E 9292&929292 Cbq bb!®92%QQ@92x 92.92§9292N &_&N 9292 9292& £1C67 _bb92§%9292R§§ Ex xmx 2 _ _ i__ 2 . 1 ALL Iican rnn E|IEI~ITiaII~1'ED- HREIE IS CLASSIFIED FD3°2@* - *695! DATE l2 LD-2008 B?60324 ucEAWfR5fL$C _ 1 - FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 195 b 7 C i i Date of transcription1 1[ 13 Z 2O Q 7 » 7, and sof - |:| the FBI Washington Field Office reviewed "box 1" of the vidence collec;vI1921s,| on llLQ2/2003 from the tee RQ_E "B EDWARDSX1" contained the foI1owing items: Item 4 G Maryland,Hand drawnan$92brass;" "barrelsto 16508 apRubya Maryla dCigbie State inand Police Hagerstown, Department application to purchase a weapon, Model 21 Baret ta 22LR. _ 1» I Item 5 Packaging for "Spector Pro" internet monitoring software. The product's packaging states it can "automatically record and monitor every email, chat, website, keystroke, search, and myspace activity your kids or employees do on the PC or internet." " Item 6 Two index cards " by 5"!. The first card had the text: "PW Snivilll," "what is the your city of birth Chico," and "what is your pet's name? Graucho." The second card had the writing: "hotkey CTRL + ALT + Shift + S" and "PW = l234!@#$." Item 7 Checkbook register. Item 8 Glock 27 gun barrel, serial number L33644, .40 caliber. Item 9 An index card " by 5"! with password information for SP6. DetailedItem 10 handwrittendirections to/from.[::i;:::::::] | i a mapquestprintout for the same address wit vthe dates of 7/2006 and 02/08/2006; additional Investigation on Hi Falls ChL1I'Cl'1,VA File# 27 - - B_E,_I - L1//7! dictatedA b6N/ SA b7C by SA This documentcontains neitherrecommendations conclusionsnor ofthe FBI. It is the propertyof the FBI andis loanedto your agency; it and its contentsare notto be distributed outsideyour agency. % I 1 Q 6 FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 BEI r92 Continuation ofFD-302 of N /A , On 1 1 / 0 6 / 2 O O 7 , Page maps for the same address but with zoomed in portions of map or Google satellite imagery. Item 11 A passport application for a nine day trip to Russia, b6 anticipated travel date of 07/13/2001; IVINS social security _ card; a newspaper article titl - " ' 'ti Graffiti," dated b"/C September 1978 in reference to painting a mural; and an article from the Frederic ews os dated March 1, 1982, titled: "Area Man Offers Juggling Course," a photo of IVINS is with the article. Item 12 indicate the Countersurveillance item was mailedon package/equipment; 12/19/2006 from GREA§shi ping SOUTHERN records _TECH. 1;n_ :a_1_12._oi,aBox_ 923, .92592ick_lerville, NJ 08081.ckage P included a set of headphone , a phone jack with three outputs, a device for detecting transmittance, and one CD labeled "white noise generator." Pamphlets indicated that the equipment could "detect eavesdropping transmitters including: body wires, room bugs, telephone eavesdropping transmitters including series and parallel telephone transmitters, concealed transmitting video cameras and the infinity bug." Item 13 _QQ MlElEE.from Blank the greeting cardstim 4 from §T. and 1995JOHN'¥92RESPECT One of LIEEthe cards has artwork from that includes text with handwritten capitol letterin . ' Item 18 Plastic gloves and a stir bar. Item 19 Film negatives appears to be of a person by a bolder with' a pla que on it!. _ Item 20 An index card " by 5"! with a list and email with addresses;the name a scra a er withand L 2 addresses; a post it I"note a thank you car rom wit a photo of92a baby included; and 10 business cards. FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 BEI cmmmmmo mamof N/A ,On11/O6/2007 ,P%e Item 21 A bag with fake hair pieces such as sideburns, and a mustache; glue, puddy wax, bruise kit, fake blood, makeup, powder and a brush. Item 22 Spiral Notebook with handwritten information about guns, firing ranges, and classes. The information contains dates around the 2005 time period. Item 23 A scrap of paper with a partially illegible license plate number for a blue sedan; a folder with handwritten notes bl./C that appear to reference church music; an index c rd " by 5"! with "P1? 65R 14;" a funeral program for SARA MAEHAMMOND . a partially addressed envelope to IVINS from , dated 11/24/2005; a scrap of paper with a phone num er an a glasses prescription; a mapquest printout for the address| I Arlington, VA. Item 24 Financial papers: Janus quarterly statement 07 through March O7, t quarter end was with account number 08/26/2007 purchase receip for a six month supply o a hair 1oss treatment;for Spectra handwrittenPro for$104.99; note witha receipt Visa accountfor Marga gt numbers;R, a receiptPardeej Memorialvisit;" spital, a gyer from dated Lab09/11/2006Safety and Su for a ly"wellne LSS! dated s guest 12/16/2005, theflyer insinuatesa pfgggouspurchase fromthe company was made; and a vehicle inspection receipt for a 1995 Honda Civic, temporary license number: TEMP00047, dated 07/14/2004. Item 25 NEWSWEEK Magazine dated 08/05/2006, cove is about the Olympicinside; bombings music sheet and there is copyrights and an article eventual about EOM and ROKAW re:§§§¬*6fthe rights for the music by IVINS; Space shuttle Challenger article dated O1/28/1988; donation recei t letter for a Challenger fund; dedication program for CHRISTA MC IFFE school in Germantown Maryland IVINS was listed as perf ming the prelude!; multiple thank you letters for donations to the CHRISTA MCALIFFE fund; address 504 E. W. Patrick; a Religion Teachers journal from 1987 addressedto lwhiteplains New York;DR1 ¢: ' Q Q FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF-222936-BEI b6 b7C Continuation 0fFD-302of N /A , On 11 / 0 6 /2 O O7 , Page pa ' ' ormation; letter to the editor dated rom of Gaithersburg, Maryland, with reference 0 MCAULIFFE; iece of paper with Bacillus subtilis information with reference to a scientific study; and papers from the Nashville Songwriters Association International dated 07/19/1986. Item 26 Envelo e labeled "Family Tree" with newspaper clippings regarding IVINS, *1 and] I Ifamily members; clipping the robbery of MR. AND MRS. W BUR C. IVINS; editorial regardingLebanon, Ohio. '" regarding Folder labeled "Correspondence 1979" with letters from various facilities/schools acknowledging receipt of job inquiries, including one from the University of Tennessee Knoxville; and letters regarding research/publication. . Folder labeled "Correspondence 1978" with correspondence regarding research/publications; letters acknowledging receipt of and/or rejecting job applications and/or research proposals; and letters regarding a job at Uniformed Services. Folder labeled "Correspondence 1976" with a letter informing of the suicide of JOHN LIMHOFF, University of Cincinnati Medical Center dated August 10, 1976; and letters regarding research and grant/job applications. Folder labeled "Correspondence From l980" with a letter regarding a visit to USAMRIID, scheduled for a visit/job offer/job posting at the University of Tennessee; letter from the University of Maryland UMD! regarding a visit to UMD in 1980; and letters regarding research, publications, and job applications. One loose letter from Texas College fo Osteopathic Medicine regarding the submission of a CV. ' Folder labeled "Letters to Others-1980" with letters regarding job applications/research. Folder labeled "Letters to Others '79" with letters regarding job applications/research; and a handwritten list of contacts at various schools/facilities. 7 ~e-_ l» to L FD-302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 BEI cmmmmme namef N/A ,Onl1/06/2007 ,Pge _5_ Item 27 Book, The Plague by Albert Camnsl The book has multiple instances where the text was underlined. Item 28 * ' IVINS' CV, his teaching and research interests, and his transcripts from the University of Cincinnati from the time period of about June 1964 through June 1976. I Item 31 Photocopies of U.S. Army Military Institute of Infectious Diseases USAMRIID! notebooks numbered: 3920, 3302, 4306, 3919, 4281, 4306, 4383, 1670, 1599. Item 32 y Faxed pages dated06/11/2004 of _ §§C mailinglaboratory notebook liveof Bacil from.E::] nthracis;[::;;;;;] information of mistaken CV;a memo from a law firm representing requesting to evalu mistakenissues withthe mailinq;CDC'scertificatesinvestigation CV's and of regarding o I| I | |' I qbu§iness card of[::::::::::::%:iEfccreditation er,' Mana an scientific journal photocopies dealing with formaldehyde and heat. a- 1 is 7 G mitinra-mtinir c|:amji:1at1:~ i I is UNCLASSIFIED Fnso2umw.10essy DATE 12-10-2005 BY @0224 ac BAUJHSJLSC Q; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION b6 b7C Date oftranscription 1 1 f O 6 [ 2 O O7 with SA On 11/02%2007Special FBI Laboratory AgentSA![:::::::::::::::]along Division, Hazardous Materials esponse ni , Haza ' ' er HMO! I I and HMOi transpo ted r evidentiary items and environmental samples collected during the search of three vehicles, a residence, an office, two lockers, and laboratory spaces within the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disea Tff:iHSAMRfID!.items wereThe transferred to the c u st 0d y of of the National Bioforensic Analysis Center NBFAC!, 1425 Porter Street, Frederick, Maryland for analyses. [:::::::]and retainedEinfi]the NBFAC was Residential not Search, readyto secure weapons, Item number 62,SAs a beige lock ox containing Stunmaster 3005, Airtaser, Stunmaster 1005, 2 Peppersprays, and Batteries. SAs[:::::]auui[:::]also retained Residential Search, Item number 47, a black briefcaset containing three firearms, further described as 1! Glock, Model 34, S/N KKP854, 2! Beretta, S/N DAA274445, and 3! Glock Model 27 S/N ERF247.p Thefirearms weretransported bySAs[:::::] and to Baltimore Division, Principal Firearms Instructor , andsecured them withwho cleared ties.zip the w SAjgf;:i:jturned o be safeover and empty, custody of Residential Search items, numbere and 62 to Inspector in Charge| i who secured theitems. items ofrom On 11/O5/2007,g::;;:%transported, SA[:::::]retrievedsecured and the items the evidentiary atthe Washington ie ffice, Northern Virginia Resident Agency- The FD 597s documenting the transfers described above, have been submitted to the 1A section of the file. mww@mnm 11/02/2007 at Fort Detrick, Maryland b File# 279A WF 222936 BEI »- /4.3 Datedictated 11/06/2007 NC This ocumen conanns l 1¬l er recommena ions nor conclusionsof theFBI. It is the property ofthe FBI and is loaned to youragency; it and its contentsare notto be distributed outsideyour agency. i 5-F ALL wnnirinn cnnriinrn , HF A 5 UEELABSIFIED F 40Z R@v10c4%! Dirt 12-1n~2nns BY ansza nu EAUERSKLEE -1- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION b6 137C Date oftranscription 1 1 f O 5 Z2 O0 7 Federal Search Warrant, Case Number 07 529 M 01, issued in the United States Distri t Court for the District of Columbia, was executed for the United. tates Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases USAM IID!, Building 1425 office 19, "mm specificallystartin theat approximately work space 8:50 b longing onp.m.to BRUCE November EDix ARDS 2007. IVINS,Special A ents |t|conducted HMRT! the , search.AlsoHMRT! present was , and FBI Document Examiner CART? [:::::::::::]mmo wasproviding on site document analysis. b6 b '7 SA[:::::::] and Postal Inspector| arrived at I [::::::%atUSAMRIIDat approximately therear entrance 7:15 of Building]p.m. where t ey || met] | | provi ed instruction to the security staff to provide agents with unlimited access to the facility in order to carry out the searches being conducted at the facility. SAs| land lconducted aninitial survey and openedbegan entrance the photosunlocked at approximatelyto office|:E| door 8:50 .m. Officeat which time|:|isa SA s are office and only areas of the office known to be occupied by IVINS were searched. " i SA[::::::] located 13savings bonds i ' 'g cabinet, for which IVINS provided the key to SA Thecabinet savingsbonds were waswhich then photographed[fp%:ffplfffd:iE:Fhelocked. SAs and¥::;:?::::]filin witnessed the location, photographing, and replacement o t e [:::::¬:]savin s bonds returnedinto the the drawerkeyto SA[:::::::f and lockin the filing cabinet. SA SA[:::::::]located three Falcontype screw toptubes containing unknown substances. One tube contained a white unidentified loose powder, another tube contained several microfuge tubes with unknown contents, and the last contained yellowish clumps of unknown origin. After the search of IVINS' areas within office 19 was completed, HMRT conducted environmental sampling and collected the Falcon type tube containing suspicious unknown sbstances. Iwwwwwcn 11/01/2007 at Frederick, Maryland File-# 279A WF 222936 BEI-'/ / F vatedtctaied by SA i b Q14 This documentcontains neitherrecommendations norconclusions ofthe FBI. It is the propertyof the FBI and ls loanedto your agency; b7C it and its contentsare not to be distributed outsideyour agency. n~ IE l _ , x FD-*302a Rev.10-6-95! 279A WF 222936 BEI ContinuationFD-302 of of , On 1 1 / O 1 / 2 OO '7 , Page _2_ At approximately 3:45 a.m. exit photographs and a final survey were conducted. A copy of the warrant and FD~597 for property collected during the search was photographed in place and left at on IVINS' desk. The followin g l t f EIHS O eVl ¬I1C¬ 'd ' WEIE S¬lZe d: 1! One blue binder labeled slides BEI; 2! Two business cards; 92 4! 5! 6! One printout from abcnews.com; Five manila folders with documents; 9! ThirteenOne piece of optical paper disks; with usernames and . passwords; 10! TwelveRed envelope "ZIP" disks; labeled safe deposit box key; One 8mm video cassette labeled "House Contents"; 11! One Western Digital HDD 120GB - Image 7! Photocopies of ID cards and credit cards; Computer;8! 12!One WesternDigital HDD120GB Image loose media including floppy disks, thumb disks; of Dell Office of various 13!One 100 MD "ZIP"disk labeled Backup drive, "ZIP" #7 FebO7" - All associated paperwork and a CD containing the photographs will be placed in the 1A section of the file under serial 7513. M ' 4I i 1~:|~:1::r V ALL INFnu nrrnmIIILAESIFIEIII nnuwnmmnn b6 DATE 12- u-2006 BY 50324 uc BAWfR5fLSE b7C 279A WF 222936 BEI -/*/7 2 ' i On November14, 2007, Special Agent[::::::::::::::] reviewed documents from evidence item 1B4377 described as "Item 106 3: One ! small cardboard box labeled [:::::::::]attorney client privilege'." The box contained documents pertaining to research b"/C conducted at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases USAMRIID! and folders containing correspondents to and/or from various individuals/groups for the years 1994, 2003, and 2004. Among the correspondence were two letters written to Senators Barbara Mi ulski and Paul S banes in June of 1994 regarding legislation c cerning workplac discrimination based on sexual orientation. Copies of these letters are attached hereto. Among the documents pertaining to USAMRIID research wa : Information on USAMRIID study number B00-03 study rabbit study!; Information on USAMRIID study D99-O292 monkey expo ure!; Information on USAMRIID stu y n er_B01 11 Bruc Ivins' formaldehyde study!; a 2003 rPA research proposal; Michigan Department of Public Health AVA vaccine lot testing information; Bacillus anthracis RMR 1030 inventory sheet; Bacillus anthracis RMR 1029 inventory sheet and production information Dugway shipments 1 to 7!; information on USAMRIID study protocols 113, D94 O9, B98 O3, 133, 116, ll4, PAl, PA2, PA7, 135, O25, 137, 136, D94 O4, and B97 03. Selected documents were copied, which will be attached hereto and are described as follows. A copy of the RMR 1029 log with notes as to what the removed samples were used for and to whom they were given. This version of the log lists the location as being in B3 cold room and the last entry date is 11/18/2003. 3 A copy of the RMR-1029 log, listing the location as being room 115, building 1412, and the last entry is dated 4/3/2000. Copies of spore preparation forms dated 9/14/1999 and 10/15/1999, indicating RMR 1029 was used for study D99 02. I A copy of a spore preparation form dated 10/16/1997, indicating RMR 1029 was used for study GLP-104-3 LP. Copies of spore preparation forms dated 04/05/2000, 04/07/2000, O4/10/2000, O7/17/2000, O7/18/2000, O4/10/2001, O4/12/2001, and 07/10/2001, indicating RMR 1029 was used for study B00-03. b6 1:-7C ALWTIIFIIPIMTI UH Clill-TFATIJEIJ I HE S UNCLASSIFIED ' DATE l.E lEl E:ElEli3 BY 60335.2 UIZ B.e'1J1II,"R.5:"L3E SPORE PREPARATION FORM STUDY #: BDG-G3 pad 1: 1-dose efficacy test with 2 PA preparations! 92 DATE: 5 April 00 SPORE PREPARER: Ivins SPORES USED: §. anthracisAmes strain RMR 1029! APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATION OF SPORE STOCK SOLUTION: 3.9 X 101°/ml DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOFSPORES FOR AEROSOL DILUTION FACTOR:|ofsporesI:I>f per aerosol suspension NUMBERANIMALS OF BE TO CHALLENGED|:| AMOUNTOF ML!SPORESUSPENSION FOR NEEDED AEROSOL: AMOUNTSPORES OF ADDED TO BOTTLE:|:| AMOUNTWATER OFADDED TO BoTTLE=|:| SPORES DELIVERED TO BE AEROSOLIZED AT: morning of 5 April 00 PLATE COUNTS FROMI:I!ILUTION!: PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 Q1 17 /5 Ea 35 AVERAGEji/' = CONCENTRATION OF BACTERIA IN SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: 92 OTHER REMARKS: SIGNATUREINITIALS OR DATE: /1/4//J/9 i/ DATA VERIFIEDBY: PL DATE: §/Q Q ALL FIE ITIFIJREATI-1:11:|:|m"AIm"ED H DA - 1 - -lL'J-ZUUB UIJELAEIEIIFIEIII3? 53324 LTET E@JJ;'R3.:"LSET SPQRE PREPARATEDN FQRFJT #: i:- av-v 1-d é '.F' !92£:!9292l 92¢ vuv: '§nQt n.--q ur 1. I-I2 92n|i92l'h nrenav-a n J I nuns; 92 DATE: 7 April 00 SPORE PREPARER: Ivins ~ - b2 SPORES USED:E. anthracis Ames strain RMR 1029! - F APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESTOCK SOLUTION:|:| DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AEROSOL DILUTION1 FACTOR: mlof sporesper _|jml of aerosoi suspension NUMBERANIMALS OETO BE cEALLENOED|:| _ AMOUNTOF ML!sPORESUSPENSION FOR NEEDED AEROSOL:|:| AMOUNTSPORES ADDED OFTO EOTTLE|:| AMOUNTWATER OFTO BOTTLE: ADDED|:| SPORES DELIVEREDTU BE AEROSOLIZED AT; II1OI Hi11g7 AprilOf 00 PLATE COUNTS EROM|:|D1LUTION!= 1 PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 92» 36 30 1? 30 AVERAGE<31], =y ' CONCENTRATION OF BACTERIA m SUSPENSlON FOR AEROSOL: 3"= ii/§ 1< 1 "1»A3-L/V» 7/,,92,/ I0"? OTHER REMARKS: SIGNATURE. b7C lNlTlALS: OR DATE: L//ZU W DATA BY:VERIFIED §>Q DATE: /aa J '3 I I ALL II1I'F0FlI=I.ATI0I1IIIEIZIITAIIIIED _ HEP! S IEIIICLASSIFIEID ILITE 12-10-2008 BY 5032-*1 U0 BAT.|I;'REi,.*L$0 SPORE PREPARATI STUDY #: B99423 part 1: '2-dcseefficacy test wi preparaticns! DATE: 10 April 00 SPORE PREPARER: Ivins SPORES USED:B. anthracisAmes strain RMR 1029! 06 APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESTOCK SOLUTION:3.9 X101°/ml MC b2 b7F DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AEROSOL: DILUTION FACTOR:1 mlof sporesper _I:I>f aerosol SIZISPCHSIOII NUMBERANIMALS BEOF CHALLENGEDCI TO AMOUNTOF ML! SPORESUSPENSION FOR NEEDED AEROSOL - AMOUNTSPORES OF ADDED TO BOTTLE: |:| AMOUNTWATER 0E ADDEDTO BOTTLE: |:| SPORES DELIVEREDTO BE AEROSOLIZED AT:morning of 10 April 00 PLATE CODNTS FROM I:|DILUTION!: PLATE 'I PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 Q8 92 L/é I0 3 / 57 AVERAGE= LII: I CONCENTRATION OFBACTERIA INSUSPENSION FORAE_rg0soL= I , I-[E1-!_I:; ALL II1IFClF'l*I¬aTIIIl]5I J I.lI*JI_iL11I 5].f' lEI.I EEIIITILIIIIED Em »-10-anus BY UC BAT.|I;"RE_.*"LSC SPORE PREPARATIONFORM A STUDY #:B00- I3 part2: 1 dose efficacywith 25 pg PA; 2 preparations! DATE: SPORE PREPARER: Ivins I ! JuIg00 SPORES USE: Ii. anthracis Amesstrain RMR 1029! APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATION OF SPORE STOCK SOLUTION: '3.9101° X /ml DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AEROSOL: DILUTION FACTOR:1 mlof sporesper _|:|_mI of aerosol suspension NUMBERANIMALS OFBE CHALLENGED TO AMOUNTOF SPOREML!SUSPENSION FOR NEEDEDAEROSOL:lj AMOUNTSPORES OF T0 ADDED BOTTLE AMOUNT' 1WATER OFTO ADDED B0TTLE=|:||: ZI?II92[ 00 SPORES DELIVERED TO BE AEROSOLIZED AT: ' PLATE COUNTS FROM|:|DILUTION!: PLATE1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 Q '5 Q C» 50 3 S! 5 7 AVERAGE C7= CONCENTRATION OF BACTERIA IN SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: OTHER REMARKS: SIGNATUREINITIALS:g DATE:OR /5 /§925a/4!;; be DATA1 b7C B VERIFIED DATE: j/f/h0! Q ALI INFORMATION CUHTAIHED HEP S UNCLASSIFIED DATE _4 lU :DDE ET 60324 UC BAHKREILJF SPORE PREPARATION FORM . -STI " 1 Y' E -"1 part 2: 1 rieseefficacy with25 E D TE:1-3.TUL00I I19 06 ticns! TC ID* > L. SPORE PREPARER: Ivins F SPORES USED: _B_. anthracisAmes strain RMR 1029! _ APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATION OF SPORE STOCK SOLUTION: 3.9 X 101°/ml DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AEROSOL DILUTION FACTOR:1 mlof spores per _I:I of aerosolsuspension ¢ NUMBERANIMALS OFBE CHALLENGEDCI TO AMOUNTOF SPORE ML!SUSPENSION NEEDED FOR AER0s0L=|:| AMOUNTSPORES OF ADDEDTO BOTTLE: |:| AMOUNTWATER ADDEDTO OF BOTTLE: I3 SPORES DELIVERED TO BE AEROSOLIZEDAT: morning 0 1-]:July 00 PLATE COUNTS FROMI:I!ILUTION!: PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 95 XI ' 3%1 I 3% as AVERAGE= E *9» CONCENT IN SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: 7 OTHER REMARKS: . ._.._ - t 1 ALL HEREINFUPMLTIUH T_111]CL£ EIFIEDEENTEINED 113.51 1" .E J.'~'-lU~l~i--I:i Q I ll I jj ii l i~lJi: E-ll LILI l:iA|.|.|_fl~!.L-. _»"J.- I SPORE PREPARATION FORM STUDY #: B00-03 part2: 1 dose efficacy with 25 pg PA; 2 preparations! DATE: SPORE PREPARER: Ivins b 6 1 ! u o . SPORESUsE1§= D. anthracis Ames strain RMR1029! - A;bC b#F APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATION OF SPORE STOCK SOLUTION: 3.9 X 101° /ml DESIRED CONCENTRATION OF SPORESFOR AEROSOL: | h DILUTION FACTOR: 1 ml of spores per |:|0f aerosol suspension NUMBER OF ANIMALS TO BE CHALLENGED|:| AMOUNT ML!OF SPORE SUSPENSION NEEDED FOR AEROSOL: |:| AMOUNT OF SPORESADDED TO BOTTLE:|:| AMOUNT OF WATER ADDED TO B01"TLE{:| |:|_| SPORES DELIVERED TO BE AEROSOLIZED AT: aid 00 PLATE COUNTS FRO ILUTIOM: PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 AVERAGE = CONCENTRATION OF BACTERIA IN SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: OTHER REMARKS: SKENATURE OR INITLALS: DATE: DATA VERiFiED BJY: DATE: | 4 I_ _ , _ _ '* WM7'f'T:T..;,_92A; 5:11- A ~ I-5?"=92 § F3f I '- 7 II ;~ <7I~ 92 1 I i»J»I~ if<-.TT:FT*"7I:'~I IIiTm7513 7T IT~ ~TI 1'IF17 J » :§§; i";I _ A - ~ "L1I~fIEL;i;,°.i$IFIIEp92 .7A .. .:92.;;:-:;5;; .Zf.f F0RM"""" 7' *5 -: *":*:$**E*1 *= is**f*"'*:"'!f*="*<%1§*"**-?=':*'?~:"f>~==;1"~_ Y>""" ='1 " ~ ' * * ' ': ' ~ " '; :" 'i; 1" » ¢~ / : t 1->-~; . - 2 .~_~~ ~rJ'< §, _ =:. _».=~_¢¢_~»_ 1-~w ~ ~ 1 92 .,, *.-.,_..-_.. _.A,,,.,...-,_. . A > _.x-»=..<_'-_.,_,,.>-~._-__:,_...__._.., ...-,:£,n;.~.v , _ 92 . _ ,_ i15sé§ef§icacy;vsdth_... :_'s.._...... <=-_=;...... .1 .__,_-._ .- .. .-D.-____,..~.92._.. pgfBA-_+;All;ydrogel!:J;;,;;;E;;.W.;w l<&924r4_<»> ,_. __.. Q A ». - .. A .- 5 ,rT25,and100. P . , _ F;A; A. > *A,w .1 .92 Qw,-~ ~ ~ DA1TE::10 &R 01:§%§§:§§@:5=¥@%@i*< ~E'5"-j~E SPORE PREPARER:Ivins l RMR-929292*1 -~>~.<>- P5»v -..», 1- .,.-.- Y .-->~.~_~. -.- P < 1029! __ <{. . __/ __..._~-A --» ._»92~-:v,~.;<.I- .~.--1-:..:.,.;;.,.-:. _-_V~b-_ .- __. __,._,_ . rt > ,_ ~ 1., 92 -~..v ~ Y !- _ OF SPORE STOCK SOLUTION: 3.9 X 101°/ml _ ~ _._-- __; ____.,_-'_,_ _j ._ .*;;,;;,_:_,,;,;:;,;_ ___ ;,_, 7;,..._4 . ¢ _ . , .1 ...-..-_._._.-_-an»-»::»<:<~==:=: _ -.: :1. A- .. ">- 92 M =.k_A *..u-D _,____4 ~ . » - OF SPORESFOR AEROSOL ~ -» >.. _q5'Q1 K_ /=>'-':.- ,¥ ~. 1-» v .. . ~ of aerosolsuspension 92 .¢5 M5092 > ». .v-- V_ 7- 92,zb92I .. ..>. .4 V» .1. ' 92 '.. . r92/4 Q 4 _ ~ . , ~ . A».92~*_ >,,,,_..A» . M OE " _ m 4 3.M. TO CHALLENGED|:| BE Y ML!~OF SPORESUSPENSION NEEDEDFOR AEROSOL: It I I 7" _ n I sPOEEs ADDEDBOTTLE:|:| TO 92_., . v_~_92_-A.92". ~ QB. WATERADDED BOTTLE|:| TO 92 92 X A. ;,._ AL- - ; ' - 92 W TO BE AEROSOLIZEDAT: morning of 10 APR 01 I I FROM |:|DILUTION!: '*§~ 92V I jf" - P|;ATE:*1~ I PLATE2 PLATE3 PLATE4 PLATE5 I >11 3? L/L» J3 jE};92v < : 2_ /_:WERIAGE=; 3; . 92- a . ' A, .~C.O'NCEN.IRATlON.OFBACTERIA IN SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: - ~ O:11HER:REMARKS: I _ V -._,S lGNATURE'0R"INITlALS :92,.,_. ,,.,<,7 _, YZ 92v*'_ 'LI92 I0I DATE: 92 ; ~»~.- ,.--.=--.=,.,@,_v.~.1-.,=~==».= -.-. ». , WP 92 - ~ ~ _ ' ' 1 '92I I////w §. A /92 ...... _.._...0... __~~ ..~ ~-.-~w...»..._...-_..-..-.1; _ ,-».~:-A.» ~5A7 - -~,~ ~.,»-»r.7;"r*t Jl*"'¢"Q_¥5r:i I¢ Aw»; *5 4;,_:- .:;,_,A__,.._.,, , _._._.,».'. _V- '.T¢w:>'.=-9.1-v _ :L_,1% /-..w .,v,,..,.¢; S j i ._ , .5Q _92_ . ---*= . 92 . ' ~. ~ ~~,r.';"'.~~1" *--:*-~'~.'"~- .~.-,5»->¢-~51-q'm-aa»5=92 a=-3»--.~.-Ea-»§U -__ R AA: 1» _.-92»~_:'92>- ~45 A:-..z»~ 3 » . -_.,' I ~ . » -_ ! 92 ~_ , . , .92; _~~_=1 -~,_~~;<_ ' _ I §::"_,"»;'~ 7_"'§,'-';'1'¬TZ§:'?§}l;Ail;*g"::~»_; ; , _~ "V:'r~ -"'f"f>»:-=»<~~.;qD<_-QM». ** I 4 , ' " """ ~ °"" En FBI;1~IFEE;ETIEE . EDI-m2;_n~1E11* »'A A- -"f "_';: --1 % R! ,-,,.-...92- .._._~.- N :° N~'V92% AT ...... _.,,...... 92,. ,»<...,-..~<92»,.',.92A.=-... "~2'-"Z .1'lL§ -'22 -3 ! !! 2 ¬"* Y"'$92 :!?iwI-"& v£§xaw "H A *"" "" >' ld>c92 I L .> K7"'> £'t$>'§ /' <4;-.1 it 4? ; , W I "" .4 _ 92 '§92 ;~4_:92~"'1!-$'§'-A -P ~ <, Q .-'.-,.- .::,. ."EI":*"%,_ _ =~_ _ .-L_> w W : _.._.:A__4,..,_:A.__~ _ T V_' _.92._ "4V avers-@>»»~¢-¢-.-ra-w-<~<-w=~e¢»~»--¢.-.__...... _..._.__.._...... _..- _pal'l"3;'1 efficacy withs,25 anddose 100*~pg PA;¥"A1Eyq§age1!jff" *:'**j'f__ ' gun»-<..A:=>---¢.=~.-; ..;1~..~,7: Ea:V. ;.=_».»¢=-ve3=-.¢5A b2 M-;~_wj_;N1_!:,_¥];»1]_1:;~»:;APR 01 12 SPORE PREPARER:Ivins 127? USED: 5. anthracisAmes RMR1029! _:;§il;-i.;.' _~:A I?PROXIMATECONCENTRATION OFSPORE STOCKSOLUTION: 3.9X 101°/ml 92 . "ww- {:35 DESIRED1 CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AEROSOL: |:| - ...__._ _1.__~ _;..~ AMOUNT ML! OF SPORESUSPENSION NEEDEDFOR AEROSOL: AMOUNTSPORES OF TOADDED BOTTLE:|:| AMOUNTWATER OF ADDEDT0 BOTTLE: |:| .; .¢»~~.C/.> E . , A . SPORES DELIVEREDTO BEAEROSOLIZED morning AT: 12of APR01 A.,.=-@A.>-=A92.»5¢~_-~¢,=-.-,=»-A.-=.A9.....»v5,.A4~¢ ii" A 1PLATE COUNTS FROM|:|DILUTION!:~ . .,.. >~92 1~.4A -i92r<92- <.~ PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 - T0 53 39 92» .~ j K AVERAGE = P O'l?1HER¬REMARKS:, ""uI4. =»-, »;~ .9>§/92 -. _.,9241; ,-r:~.'P>*~' i=H~Mvw.~ H . ,*92 92m'~.92f,_ ,__I, _.._ » r*9292:. 4 A A ""T§lG N7-92.1iURE¥§R;lNjill92il;S~:|:|M OT DATE:W. LI "i HATMVERlFTEEB M~ D¢,;T~E:;¢~A;7 ;7,;/W A ~ ~ ._ ~ ...... ,..,_»==u.,»..,._..A...--»-F-1-<,.-<»- ,...,.,.,.,.L,,.-¢.~;--»»>»---¢-=E..-°<.i=..».,-....L».7 ,.w>.»..L_.T , 1 I, /4; ,~. 92A QR.; . .._ . .' _ _ 4 . . -, ~ , ~_ ,1 ._ Z --»1'¢.¬=» . ' '1--.;¢1_i-?»__»1. "la: _ ~¬ v 4A 2, ._ ». A , 92 SPORE PREPARATION FORM STUDY#: B00-03 part4; 1 dose efficacy with 1,5, 25 and 100pg PA per dose! DATE: 10 July 01 SPORE PREPARER:Ivins SPORES USED:§. anthracis Ames RMR1029! APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATIONOF SPORE STOCK SOLUTION:3.9 x 101°/mi DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AEROSOL: DILUTION FACTOR:1 mlofspores pe||:|»f aerosol suspension NUMBERANIMALS OF BE TO cHALLENGED=|:| AMOIiNTOF SPORE SUSPENSIONML! FOR AEROSOL: NEEDED AMOUNTSPORES OFADDED T0 BOTTLE:|:| AMOUNTWATER 01+"ADDED TO BOTTLE:|:| SI_ ORES DELIVEREDTO BEAEROSOLIZED morning of AT: 10 July01 PLATE COUNTS FROMEILUTION!: PLATEPLATE 1 PLAT; 2s PLATE 4 PLATE s PI* 2 5 ms E1P AVERAGE= Z 1!, ' BACTERIAm SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: OTHER REMARKS: SIGNATUREINITIALS: OR DATE: / / jg /5 / DATA VERIFIEDBY: DATE: /Z/My0 /Eli} _ W *4 ALL NFEIRILIETIIIIIJ IYIFIJTAIIIIED HERE Ul¥ICLz1$SIFIE[:~ DATE lZ lU 2ClU§i ET 653324 UC E£*J.lT:"E5f'L$C SPORE PREPARA'!'lL-PlFORM F STUDY#: Ga/A /0L! 3-L/0 , DATE: /0//@ / INVESTIGATOR:77 R 5,/MM R [0a._Z_z;/$1 6 '3 SPORES E.USED: anthracis Ames strain,reference material-, in 1% phenol APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESTOCK SOLUTION:3 ,2 1/0/Q /:14 /,,, / LDILUTIONDESIRED1 CONCENTRATIONmlofOF SPORESper sporesFORof AEROSOL:Umlsuspension | aerosolFACTOR: NUMBERANIMALS OFBE CHALLENGED: TO Cl - ED FOR AEROSOL: | AMOUNT OF SPORES ADDED TO BOTTLE: AMOUNT OF WATER ADDED TO BOTTLE: SPORES DELIVEREDTO BEAEROSOLIZED $115 AT:0 Q m / 0/9 7 PLATE COUNTS FRO DEUHON!: PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE s 5 ,1 5 7 Li / 3 5 #1 7 AVERAGE= 5 3, ,1 CONCENTRATION OF BACTERlA IN SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: OTHER REMARKS: V010 P 1125? SIGNATUREINITIALS: OR48% DATE: /0//5/7 V 7 DATA v'ERiFiEDBY: DATE: /0 //7//,2 79 /T/To3/2a /4;./W,/ 0 A 'II IHFURHHTIUE IS U1 ~IILIaS IFIEII92 EDHTAINED. "IL'1'.E l° lCl ;:.IIEl E-ET I5El3'7 < 1 UL E.ZU|F;"RS_.*'LSC SPORE PREPARATION FORM - STUDY #1 D99-02 W DATE: 14 SEP 99 SPORE PREPARER: Ivins SPORES USED:§. anthracis Ames, RMR1029, in 1% phenol APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESTOCK SOLUTION:2.5 X 101°/ml DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AERos0L=|:| DILUTION 1FACTOR: mlof sporesper |:Iml of aerosolsuspension NUMBER ANIMALS0F TOBE cHALLENGEDI:| AMOUNTOF SPORE SUSPENSIONML! FOR AER0s0L|:| NEEDED AMOUNTSPORES OFADDED TO BOTTLE:I:I AMOUNTWATER OF TOADDED E0TTLE=|:| SPORES DELIVEREDTO BEAEROSOLIZED 0730 AT: - 6-2/,1 2/E; / PLATE FROM!- COUNTS LUTION ' PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 2 PLATE 4 PLATE s 74» O. 7 3 $1 $2 / ?@ -Z> ¢/ AVERAGE P?=-5' / CONCENTRATION OF BACTERIA IN SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: OTHER REMARKS: SIGNATUREINITIALS: OR5 £71 - DATE: 7/>33/f I " _»/in DATA VERIFIEDBY: DATE: 9,73 .7 *92 I g PW iwgmw A M A ALI.Htpig 1~r1-op:-mTIn1~: U11CL;,:;:5;[FIE11FEI~TDlIIdEIJ A "13 '-" - -~-~~»-*»~»~~~~~-~~»~--~~*~~ == ¢"".]- U" 2UU=3 |;-10:2-11EFF UC B.h.i1J_PP!.;=:_:La t i** SPORE PREPARATION FORM STUDY #: D99-02 DATE: 15 OCT 99 SPORE PREPARER: Ivins 1? SPORES USED:B. anthracisAmes, RMR1029, in 1% phenol _ APPROXIMATECONCENTRATION SPORESTOCK SOLUTION: OF 2.5 1'0" /mlX DESIRED CONCENTRATIONOF SPORESFOR AEROSOL:|:| DILUTION FACTOR:1 mlof sporesper|:|0f aerosolsuspension NUMBERANIMALS OF TO BE CHALLENGEDTII AMOUNTOF SPORE SUSPENSION ML! NEEDEDFOR AERO_SOL:|:| A192/IOUNTSPORESADDED OFTO BOTTLE:|:|nicr0liters AMOUNT OF WATER ADDED TO BOTTLE:_|:|m1 SPORES DELIVERED TO BE AEROSOLIZED AT: 0730 PLATE COUNTS FROM|:|DILUTION!: PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 Q0 Q I Q CI 353 AVERAGE Q5,= 4, CONCENTRATION OF BACTERIA m SUSPENSION FOR AEROSOL: OTHER REMARKS: b6 SIGNATUREOR INITIALS: 5 , Q/ADATE: /0/ 5» /- 5//7 b7C DATABY! VERTFTED DATEI 0 :6./T5/ AL£I~IFCIF!Z-LETI L C lIlI1TAII~1EIlI Ell-I HERE 5 UHCLAESIFIED DATE J.2~29*2ElC!¥3BY 50324 AC lu t-I _q U.S. ArmyMedical ResearchInstitute ofInfectious Diseases Reference MaterialReceipt Record Date Received at USAMRHD : 'Q R @a7' G/7 Bruce .ZT'ri ?1.5 Received by:H':5}'9 pm7"4e / ~ . m 95 _ §/'¢-;»-$5,. Mké Y// =¥n/k»;§,/_ /I/3X!O"'"//:14 Dex g eazl"$CJ?£:/~40/0'pfw/>1I ,5/éi I/5 /L//3 Vendor _ 7 /9 " 5 5" /"/6'/n<=_'> .Z"0z¢.¢ Condition: QQ!/ Q Intact Container: @ N Temperaturearrival: uponQ -3°C 4 C§em;uj5"4MR/[D_7792°/¢*?~P»>?5f?,0/l0,5/'@/§,_/ezé ilp 7_.}7¢°5e we arieMrzéfzgang/LQZ;é4_,var,,- Efim-es, '!¬m Reference MaterialInventory: , l . Amount In Amount Used ; Date ~ Balance Left it. 8 aw _£0_0n_m/lm o i W * A is/5s 5 7? 119ml ' J <2 Q9/0p A 8'<§ 8'm/é v z'53OlVJ 02 _3Q§0¢ 92905m-' ' ,_ a 1 l l 92'l l +- l 2 -1 'AL 11-rF|-Pm": ma cul-11111-ran ' i I-IE H FIIQIILASSIFIEIJ Q ' _ mn"£"~l'-1-10-'=ur-".. - .13 2 :.m2=2-1 LTIZBiLTiI_.* P!.S; LEiIZB" 1 _ . - _ i , U.S. Army MedicalResearch [nstit teof Infectious Diseases ' ' r . Reference Material Receipt Record um ReceivedatUSA1V[RIID ; 42 02@< /7" O77 Bruce .Z ¢// vzs USAMRIIDNo.:I 0 Q !Pm ml 1»:No.1 gf ia /e Sllpplitf_ W2Du we» g'§g";f/£3? rav/ /33 L Q¢'1_/,5,-Ln am-,Quantity: _ " 1 0601"} ii 7 7=ZZv?;/ 'piration E Date:37e0 °C- 570 St : Q" $°C92 /7 I. 0 _ Vendor: .. _/=' Sirgfnramam /?me.$,j¢9u/Q __B__%_. z;'m@s°"g°4%3%~§@7r¢1""?f wig Ii/7' ' 11/,7-6"/ - Condition: Q QVIZ i Intact Container: @ N Temneratureupon arrival:Q Iii "C Commentf ' .5¬ Cl5I'4MR/1D/i/v[§§u§;A/ . /7 e s we 4'-A<~;a~>'=25z'ur¢¢zn@W2 P .5/JOEB r ;/gg/15,./iesz Reference Material Inventory: Amountln 3 Amount Used Date : ' BalnneeLeft' it. . 1 [:19 e _~ M B'77~0/"15;. 1 ' / 64 .677-0»; 5/5 77 ?9'F* /'~ /Wm . 2 A ~ " W¢~:¢' a 6!; @g A *;'&'5'¢ii/_ X e 1. z9~ j :9éZ 0.? @121 ! -592' 0 en Q6 M e ea =/25¢k@+2@,,,; em C *1? mm, J /521%/ma1;: iC.~'i'%L¢",/ en'gill ml " .'% cwd7M/*3 //?/>R -> 0,-Q1 . , 92A/Z?!/3; 5200/'7/é<>77"/ 0%/W " 9 "P i9@ él, w b ,~a»m,-ws *;/ Amount In Amount Used Date Balance @;,1@gW/ éoml B0|>~0_-,. 67,2/V 0 1, . _ _;,;g gym; @151/1'! aai¢ $5/I. 5 * 2}{m/. ,_] . r 2 567m] . ah _35 7/'1/ Q llr- ~ Mm in mli 51! 92 92 <5 ~ "L... ii? eeewve ,2,,292 elm/ I , 1/0! Sm an -H 557ml ;<~/_' __- 19 £9 I * B0|;.u§. @.'_tg 2 F If 0/ 25% / 92 <; _ "_ c __=.77 ~? mL _ Jim! 7 ¬fg?5¢,J IQ; oak O2£"92 2 . @278/W wi ¬C 1:91»' %§*;a ""! 8 HQ,» ml -425' 1579/ 4/<2Z7m/ .,27_ Q 92 .'Z¢?92 mm Q ,;£gG;/ ékQ91 50m 5' 0.2 »?.>}_ Sm 1900 v5par §@/70 0,1 ER 92 3 3 in //Vgy 0.3. %§§%} .» , mu gv j-w _ ~ /; ___._,,__. - f ._,..._,.. I ' ~ -.. ; .,..,_...,..~_...~_~¢- _.._~_..,.-.<.~.._____~__4.~.--.,~..,__....~.-Q.-M..-, i ~ K ~ r*_ ' 1 -_ f ~_'.92 .. ,5» W 92 5;»; g < 1: 1* 't_.", ,.: 5¬-"_ _*»~ r v-¢~ ,_.~...,&. . ,, , ,b,,,,;___92 __ __,92 _ ~_92N__,_ ,, 4+7 _._, - =.;.: x - ,¢<7.¢_,..-92~.--92~..~, ¥.»._ _N ;:,_-._,-,1.,92. £4 »<:~..~= -=.»_;,¢», ¢» ;92;<. y, =. » ~ ,~~,.,., , - n. , i a _ 92-. .-_ , , =4 ; . . ,+ A . _- _» _ 1. »_ W.. _ »,.92- 1 . ,,92 sq 1 v,~ _. 92~ - '- a~_ >,,<~ 1 - .. -Y 1 , .~~:< . ¢ »~ 1" ;- m-M" 92 z~~* sq 92 _ .1: -.._ =92-h Y <, __z, ¢";_ ,'._~ ,1;__92,» 92§A> ;" {' ,3 , ~_+ @,*~_';_ ,. Q .-W 5 ; _ ~ §j~;;;-A - k» 92 5 r. ; *~~ ;_ :i"" 1 >.'. J;- I-£1 ~-'Z .§ -0:11 ': I 21 . . 92 "~ 92 . '* V. . 1 Y 92 "< 92~" 1» .. ,~ ;;, 92 ~ 7 Ff , __ 7 . Vw_ X .. '1 ; -§~ 9~v;1i1~*~»:;:>§1;~=.@--¢>=~, yl ~= 92 _1,f.:-3-Z», ~92 fq.~<~s' .92~.-NW " _ 92 V r._...... V . H _ ., . -.»;_92 -».~~>.>.;A<-.,:_% Ma; __;_;. ,_.,<, _Lu a 4 . 92 .> 92. . . 92 ' _ 92~ _ ._ . . ~ . < .+92~:..~.._. ' , 1». . :~ .~ _ < . . ~ 9292 92 _ _ _ _-92 D ---92,'~ m-.._-A.._. ~_».,,A, . < . - . * "' * 92 ~ ' ~ ' ' . A '>¢z; ;="Zm/~ @.5»%@~;~° 7§£#4* ¢,§@r;@@;@u » / Wn4,,,¢,% 5 M W '1 Y ~/W7 ~ é- ¢,,¢>/mg/4/1=;»¢ < 74;, Q vu:~:~;~ 92-1 'n".u92avs: . ;<~. _ : 1~. j 5 5@ ¢76A F /MIL ?/b/Z_¬; ' -$1/érrzw i§=%;42¢>»%/ ~5,f ~- <2»/,¢5<=~»-¢,,, | »/@113/< v 92 I» , _ .92 - _~ ~- . .,92 vv v.»>,92V. .92 _V X . * 1 A _ L / ' ~ A Q 4 92 r' 92 [Q//gf/Z ? ;1/¢>;@/ 4 j. I j c@.¬L ; ;:.~_z75f _, *[;»__ + *4» W/ ¬@@ -"&-@§%@;w/4%; %¢~w~»-1 { --- ---v------~~§-*-4- -~» ~»~»-»~~ 1-]5§l~ l-'»~:-/*l7-_,.,/__?A _% { 1 ~ ----._,._.__,,-._.v -.,._.. .-._ _» ; 5_ ; ~, _~; ~..-I ,1 f~I1§&lli92<>~ ~ 4 A b Q; F ' "' """""'" '--*' "="-' '921=='-'-- -~~ :'- 1---7' . »_ , » '___,,_ ___,~, _ , _, _ . K -___{ . '_ , e~ 4 ~ Y . 1 Y" ~ " . I V V, " _ * 4 ~°- -9- _.. JRQ1 -...-... -. ;i'.'g ~ .!.%1 '3' 55 !-x',,, =3 > ~ ' »~ 92 1' ' " " '""'" _ fv '3: .~ f -»7- 92' ff" _ 1- ' > -*7 . '4, * " F ." , _-. < -= - =5 '3-= i -2 . ~>~=~=-==>;~ »---~;5--f- ~ :~ M-w _ .- ~.i' '~ >_- _ : :., . _,_».L- .1-_A,-..»,,_,,-, .;; +' _ ,.J J21 Y -> ~'; ~_. gf -*!_,¢~1 ;.- §. <3;. _' .~-jg-i;.i2 g. »:~».;v. . ..~_92';~U_h I »; - - ~ J ~ , * ,- 1 1 » , Q -'..: ' < », ,1 ,7 _, 92 ,, . = ~,. _ W»,-~ -~,~ U3. .92,.-3w.-5 N, W W "" ~' ,1 .:_ .v_ 1; j mm . »<_¢==¢>§=.- =-u@= *-v--1- >=- w .~<'1¢~ <;a921-~ an W-<1ss-a xv a 1» »-,w ~47 ..__ ; ?¢ ~~:,: $1»: as: _ ¢=. w ~¢- ~»...4 do»--,- ~.- ..:~.-s-»r>+921..~m,»sa~ _»auu_.-;.=s.a~=-=,14¢*-¢~..»~»~»v~.-~ B=J¬.392>*4J A *4 """ ._..}/92'7k_92..» " * * ..92.:._,, .. _-__,_,_~.....,~...-,___.,_ M A n ... PM _6 N J. .> ..~.»>».~ ~< .,._4. ~.... ~>~{.492»-A »~ /12> L7 k/41//J6°47 P 56% i rfd ~;1/;3"$ m/51¬éZ/¬7~QW£/% I§"P fr//7 Q gét 00- l };>m/;,@% wA .. .1 *1! M 6'1 -- 9,5/U ~ jenf /,@/!/9;/96,, A/L/' 6 51/J Mf "37""/~ WW3/;w; 5 @g5> c:£4=/é;,p _*,1/;9'_}...M§ 9/ ZQM c@m»:@%,Z~Ap/>9.§;»~2¢w/ 7% |:|: '/iéf/:¬//6 1524/4 @/ 55 7!é[4 37m/J>g[% ?WC?W@2[%//{ / 2 <= A 4 1//>5?/W M?/M//Q /Bw/5 ,7//'r7Z [%/%7 < %%//%_ i 90 av 5&5 9 ? g /0 $c ' 0 /3 295 $ /¢/7491/L/ d j-a 3 g /2Q ggg//¢,@ J25 25% M 6 K % " " » I ¢ _ " ~ --- __ /9WQCQIIW5-4 ._-<_...... _... . -..-W -...... ,_ - -<- »-,- ... »....,_.¢- _.___.._._~..>...._-._ .__ ' ~ _._~_. __ W ___ ~__.~,»~..~..~.... w. ,_, A ____,______ H _...,m._..... ______ ___ M5 A __L __ km i I 92 ~ _?92wwum4m; 10.»,92 . ,-* ' Q ALL I]5IF URI~!lATIUI=IA _ '. , ~s~ 1:1:11s1'rAI111E1: '1/I - i, 1" » DAIE1-11:915; 12-10-2000 BY L11-IELASLSZLFIEIII 5032-=1EAT1I.1"R5r'1i§|f: "92' <1_ LTII Listing Based Upon Number oflm muni'zatio ns AVA Lot # of immunizations 'Challenge dose # of spores! Challenge strain % Survival FAV018 1000 V1 B 60 g 1 / Lot 18 . 7280 Ames 642 .. 2 Lot 18 200,000 Ames 25 .Lot18 200,000 Ames 45 7 E335 _S ;i../ 0' FAVO06 1000 Ames 58 / FAVO06 10000 Ames 40 FAVO06 100000 Ames 58 FAVO06 1000 V1 B 88 l°QI°E"' 92 FAVO06 10000 V1 B 83 FAVO06 100000 v1 B as FAVO06 200000 Ames ' 25 ._/=m::f7l- 1 $".,,;/Y'§ 7 5 3 - FAV012 10000 Ames 70 .NL 1000 Ames 65 NL I 10000 Ames 60 NL 100000 Am es ,1 60 - - . FAV008 50000 Ames 42 ;-e-@/14510 FAVO06 1000 Ames 91 FAVO06 FAVO06 10000 Ames 58 100000 Ames 42 ¬ FAVO06 1000 V1 B 92 FAVO06 10000 V1 B 92 FAVO06 100000 V1 B: s2_ 1 FAV01 8 10000 Ames 6 ~ FAV018 10000 V1 B 56 FAV038 FAVO38 10000 10000V1BAmes 94}"P 75 _,~3_3 kqg 85- NL 4300 Ames 71 Lot 19 /10/87! 4000 Ames 87 Lot 1s s/21/ea! 4000 Ames 80 Lot 18 2/1/88! 4000 Ames 87 1.01 13 8/s/as! 4000 Ames 74 05,132,,/4~z~¬1.A~ Lot 16 /17/85! 4000, Ames 93 Lot 19 1/20/87! 4000 Ames 60 NL 3300 Ames as NL 2900. "7/N 92 NL 3000 AmesAme 13$ j,¢,,;s,=1r:»1z1z.2@1*2 §; NL 3000 Ames 55 Note: FAV01 8 2 10000 Various other range 6-100 isolates of B. anthracis N' :31! /3 ".517 FAVO38 2- 100.00 92/arious other rangez -=56 isolates of ' ALL .I* _$I..TI|III-I EDI-TTELIZED HEPIE .3 UltICL§sSSIFIE[:~ wn DATE l2 lE ZElCIEl ET 60354 UC E£1J.I.T,.-"E3 L5C' b7C June 24, 1994 Senator Barbara A. Mikulski Suite 320 Hart Of ce Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Mikulski: This letter is in reference to the proposed legislation by Senators Kennedye_t_ gl, that would ban discrimination onthe basis of sexual orientation in the workplace. That bill should exclude from its protection those individuals whose sexual orientation preference! is minor children. We are constantly reminded of the sexual abuse of children, although some individuals such as those in the North American Man-Boy Love Association! would argue that there is nothing wrong with adults loving children - they would call it "consensual" - in a sexual manner. Much "of the sexual abuse of children is directed at young girls by stepfathers,uncles, cousins,older brothers, "friends" of the family, even fathers. As a Catholic, l ve also sadly watched as individual after individual has detailed the sexual abuse which they suffered as children at the hands of some priest. My point is this: we must not give adults who are sexually attracted to children the statutory rightto be hired for jobs which place them in intimate contact with children. Such positions include, for example, camp counselor and day care worker. Imagine, if you will, the following scenario: An individual walks into a daycare center which has advertised an open position for an aide. The individual was previously arrested for molesting a child, but never convicted because the child refused to testify. The individual says to the head of the daycare facility, "l am applying for your open position. l have a masters degree in child psychology - here are my college transcripts. I love children, and l ve been around them a lot in the past. Oh, by the way, my sexual preference or orientation is children, and if you don'tme, hire l will sue you for discrimination againstme on the basis of sexual preferenceor orientation." l suggest that Congress may wish to acid a clause to any statutory prohibitionagainst discriminationon the basis of sexual orientation. Such a clause would exempt pedophiles fromthe protection. Such a _ clause might read, "...exceptwhen such preference ororientation is directed toward a minor child." Sincerely, Bruce E. lvins 4 ' g ALL IHFCQIUIII cmrmtr-IED .. HEREIN 11;. . -IIILASSIFIED DATE l2 lEl .:. ElUB B1" TIE BJlTJ.* R5.i"L§:?II Io 6 I June21, T991 1"!/ '4 Dix, Senator Paul S. Sarbanes SD-332 DirksenSenateOf ce Building Washington, D.C. 20510 lDear Senator Sarbanes: This letter is in reference to the proposed legislation by Senators Kennedyet gl., that would ban discrimination onthe basis of sexual orientation in the workplace. That bill should excludefrom its protection thoseindividuals whosesexual orientation preference! is minor children. We are constantly reminded of the sexual abuse of children, althoughsome individuals such as those in the North American Man-Boy Love Association!would argue that there is nothing wrong with adults loving children - they would call it "consensual" - in a sexual manner. Much of the sexual abuse of children is directed at young girls by stepfathers, uncles, cousins, older brothers, "friends" of the family, even fathers. As a Catholic, l ve also sadly watched as individual after individual hasdetailed the sexual abusewhich they suffered as children at the hands of some priest. My point is this: we must not give adults who are sexually attracted to children the statutory right to be hiredyfor jobs which place them in intimate contactwith children. Such positionsinclude, for example, camp counselor and day care worker. imagine, if you will, the following scenario: An individual walksinto a daycare centerwhich has advertised anopen position for an aide. The individual was previously arrested for molesting a child, but never convicted because the child refused to testify. The individual says to the head of the daycare facility, "l am applying for your open position. l have a masters degree in child psychology - here are my college transcripts. l love children, and l ve been around them a lot in the past. Oh, by the way, my sexual preference or orientation is children, and if you d0n t hire me, l will sue you for discrimination against me on the basis of sexual preferenceor orientation." l suggest that Congress may wish to add a clause to any statutory prohibition against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Such a clause would exempt pedophiles fromthe protection. Such a clause might read, "...exceptwhen such preference or orientation is directed toward a minor child." Sincerely, Bruce E. lvins ALLQUPIQTIUDI CCII~ITAIIlIEI3 HEPEIN IS UEELELSEIFIEIII DATE l2 lIII~El3l3E? Bl ':TU32='lUII B 279A WF 222936 BEI '14?! A Zl On November 15, 2007, Special Agent reviewed documents from evidence item 1B4376 descriE e as " ack briefcase w/name[:::::::]written on latches, doc, notebook, files inside." The briefcase included various documents, a small spiral notebook, and a hymn book. A number of select documents were copied and will be attached to this document. Among the of do ' ' to RMR documents not copie ' were d copies 9 1029; a copy of a civil suit inv notebook listing what appears to @1vingbe mileage of a a vehicle; spiral calendars from July October 2001'with written notes; information pertaining to information pertaining to a patent; information on various a ima studies being conducted in U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases USAMRIID! suites,E::::] around the time of the anthrax mailings; prescription records BRUCE IVINS requested in 2005; copies of information previously provided to the FBI. Brief descriptions of the documents copied and attached hereto are as follows: Copy of the Washington Post article from July 18, 2000 "Anthrax Shots Effect Challenged" which is critical of the vaccine. Copy of the 'original'RMR 1029 inventory sheet listing room 115, building 1412 as the storage location. Copya ofletter from[::::;::;:::]to IVINS BRUCE postmarkedApril 11, 2006 in Trenton NJ wit a text of "Hello Bruce, A gift from Princeton. Enjoy the postmark. Copies of calendars from September and October 2001 with notations of activities with which IVINS was involved. Copy of the original packaging in which the "Ames" strain was shipped to USAMRIID. 92 note to[::]LNU writerbelieves to this be[:%::] SAMRIID, security! requesting keycard access ecords for he e iod between 2 15 2002 and 04/15/2002 for IVINS, and Copy of an e-mail to in which IVINS suggests br| may ave een involved in the anthrax mailings92 A P I 1:6 137C 279A WF 222936 BEI 2 1 Copy of a print out from the University of Georgia, Chemical Analysis Laboratory, containing information on the services they can provide. Copy of a print-out from Fitzsimmons and Associates, Inc., Chemical Analysts and Consultants, containing information on the services they can provide. Copy of an internet article from The Straight Dope.com regarding validity of handwriting analysis. Copy of an internet article4regarding validity of handwriting analysis. Copy of an internet web site, ExpertPages.com, listing handwriting experts in Maryland. ' Copy of an internet web site, www.handwritingexperts.com. Copy of an internet web site, Expertwitness.com, listing document handwriting, linguistics, and handwriting! experts. Copy of a print out from Intertek C.B., containing information on elemental analysis services they can provide. Copy of a print-out from Northern Analytical Laboratory, Inc., containing information on the services they can provide. Copy of an abstract titled "Wire Analysis Using Fast Fourier Transform Processing Techniques in Paper Identification Cases" from the Challenges & Changes , 17th International Cymposium on the Forensic Sciences. Copy of USA vs. Altigraci Rosario regarding forged treasury checks. I Tunsnnr, JULY 18, 200° "92-hp so Tm: WASHINGTON Posr . . 1 j: Q ' I .-2 I is t "1 '1 ELL IIIIFCIPHATIEIII CEHTAII-TEIB V 5' , re =. 1 HEREUI TH l.lTIIlTI.¬tZ'i5TFTFITJ --_-_.i-_.- ---_--. - ------u -.n-.-_------,_ - @---.--u ¢- - --_--_._-J - as .v. *' ----v A . . -» ~zY1 . »~ 92; . 0-» 92~ ii! . érrtlirrax 1 , &92~ . ,-,3 '~§ <.~x_ ' "11, 1 " e=g§:_:292, - »~ eix 'aw ._ . ' - r Q I-Is ; " Y It ~ r. vi s, ¥ @- ~= . ~',.,_a-_fL1;,.:-.2: ea»-»;.5*: ¬};92¬9292~§ ..<~. >92- us ~¬~ 1; s. . cg} i -. " ,§. 9 . 9 , := ~ _,._s;;<. . cg 92 ~ <_., r . - 1, ~;;~. ~ ~ 1/- as is 92' arr? . . . I . g Qg 3- » - is 3; 9 . "5' ' '-- Q - I '-'3 . ~ 92p . '§}*§ ; ~< -"f_ ,,§" °92~:* 92* *=--~J, ~ " ii; . ' k. ~ vi; E ' 92 ' 92 ° tted Effect .34; . ,i1;-22-3. I =_; -i." ',_ ="< .': ,s §r92 ~ »: »;,_,;,-.1 ! _ . p Q ? §:$"?»= ,. J '_ ::., _»,,Q 92 1 R1 K A. L ; ,! »A_1 t ' '15"? ~»- .. . -sm:.- , » : g. » 1-~;_ s ~»92 . ..,. . :,, tliaaiierrged . _3. 92 _ _< , §;q;<,5~-'w~§x%§u-<33 .:_._» , i ;f,'=3._c 11...,.4- , i _ i Q hf ,;,.~<;,.;.~e~;.':*:;_' ~ * 3 j W ,*a< U.S. Army Medical Research Lnstitute of Infectious Diseases Reference Material Receipt Record Datelleceived atUSAB/RIID: 02 C76/71' Q/7 Bruce 1 :// W5 Rewivedbyi ii; Hp 71I¢ 7P *,/92./ 'g GI 7L/1571'/J5 m 95 $f%;|y92 $j /u in/ML 11'/"£ L £ , I7/2Q,1 Deserilltion: 'n5 :""" "£°? 7e /p"& P MP7/W1 71 /b"7§" 1 USAMRIG! ?:.u1No.: Z50: I 0 ewl élq 3'/bi// n5 6,-/aw,J LotNo.: Mi }§Zg£/41:05/12 Supplier *u%§§/§$1;5¢;p. ", ;,},,, Quantity: 1000!?!! Expiration Date: 3 X0 t G 1 U051 Storage: Q $56K,"/1 ! /7&0" /§P/'w/ Vendor: mm L if -* Q "$ . 554"/"1, >! w/M61/11 es £0/M-éa1/5' ,3/' /L//9; Condition: [1 Q}/ Q g_Q6 ¬/ 4 . / ' Intact Container: N Temperature upon arrival: Q "- 5 "5 Comment: ____ ' I11?/¬m~<=',>¢]52,a/r;c[@,4p@?5/Yly/§J:;§ Reference Material Inventory: Amount In 1 _AmountUsed A _1m= Balance Left 1 gun. ,1 Emmi A L/~11 2/We/w 1new reg 1 1 1 1 > . 1 1 1 I 1 ' . 1 1 1 ;;' 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 '1_ _ 11>, 5 l' V 1 1 - n , wM. -wuwIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII||ll||l|lI|l|lllH !!!! um 1 -- 92 ALL IKFDRKATIUN EDNTAIKED HEREIE IS UHCLAESIFIED DATE 12-if-E BY EDEEQ UC EAWfR3fL$C k @ I/'1/¬'I /5/¢< v /'1k,//J Z J/k' / T /'1"-' " //. //J/, »4r if F ! ajpf '4//4?¢>!}%%h¢Z//ff 92 > 92 I 92 be F =~v,~ w 92 :'_.__ i ' 1 F 1 E 1 3 *. ? ? ;. an r. ; . r 92 L I *.~ L 5 oat FBI Itiatnouman otomatiaoa I-iERiiI1I i.oi|:aoaaasa1ai:~is ta M3 /4 ii pigGuineaimmunization active experimepm - to l3'l'j_ E'U§Zgf35 --a6'1" "H"E iii Mouseimmunization activeBP T T"'}H { ;Ei experiment September Z001 s1September2001 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 . - 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 5316 17 24 1825 19 26 27 Z0 21 28 2922 21 28 29 22 23 30 31 24 25 26 27 Mootai , 112511311.a.__1.M@_io§9ai__ W.oo.....t____£osiay.--_s. ._t..Q;l_.Toute mouse check 8:00pm NightGuinea & pig mouse check . ., ..d__-m.,- 1 - .7 iIl**4 *- ...... Jo - 1 8:00pmNight pigGuinea &8:00pm Guinea Night& 8:00pm pig Night pigGuinea &8:00pm Guinea Night& -8:00pm pig Night pigGuinea &8:00pm Guinea Night& pig mouse check mouse check mouse check mouse check mouse check mouse check _...i_.---.--.-_..__..--,._- .1 as 8:00pm NightGuinea & pig mouse check I 1, . L .. .s -..,.... _.._,--.. am. .,_- ,...92.I3:a.- ...._.._.,...... -_-._ ..._mI410e...-,.. 1 is 1 1 ._.._o.__1_Q__;W_ 11 , _ 12 _ 1, , ,, __ 8:00pmGuinea Night pig8:00pm Guinea Night& 8:00pm pig NightMouse check 8:09pmMouse Night check check&mousemouse check check _ '"'" ,"'f"";' 7" fg 8:00pmNightcheck Mouse 7 .1 12.. ymy -i II » -. . ,.-_.._ ....- , -. - 1 1 K 7 =- ,- mm-- ~- 8:00am__, Trip 18:Covance to in 19» _ _ of 20, 1 21"" '12 i Denver, PA ,1 23 . . . V 1.-_ mm. .-.- .1- .. ,_. nr1m/~|rn1114~I9292¢92iln>:|1_ 1... ..2é!.o.._-s..-_,,, .__i,._s,_.35 ZN 1 @126. s-___ 27 ,,_s .1 8:00pm mouseNight check8:00pm Mouse Night checkj, _.,--.,-...."..... _.._...'..-a.... , -...... i92 ,; -~ "tan7' a 8:0DpmMouse Night check';;§E '1/ 3 ' is Y>{12, 1 _ 92 V 1'passiveexperiment Mouse immunizationI Mouse #1 Passiveexperiment immunization1 , YJ/ _ #2 ,1 if, » -3, -1 Ii Mouseimmunization Passive#2|:| experiment b6 b"iCi October 2001 Nuvemberliiiil ' 5 M T W T F S , 7 8 9 11 12 13 4 ' i 14 15 16 18 19 20 1 Z 3 21 Z2 23 25 26 27 115 5 7 8 9 10 28 29 30 12 13 14 15 16 17 1819 Z0 21 22 23 24 25 Z5 Z7 28 29 30 Mondg .. u _Tge§@. Y _ ; ___.Y _iN_qdnesda , ______Ihgngdan 1 _ F11daY__._1..... -_ Hi._5__ai/iii" 1 ommmmmmmmii "WMi £11 4F_ '7niwww §:[J[ipm NightMousecheck Bzq gmNightMousegheck _§:iJ_0gi11Mouse; m Night,& check __A§;Q[Jp_r11 NightMouse M W;§;QQpm check Night Mousecheck _; T 1 -Iif J'L"', 7 : f~""'1"', .1?,Aj--,v*"i""""""921'i i. 1: ii»-1» t M '12 W, _,_m_, _,1n _ _ 91 1 1 10L ' J 11, ~ ~ w ;_i,,/. ]-21 ' r.-. 11.1. I.7_*.7T7""+ '1.; "1. M1.-r";i 11 .J~i==.1 '11 ~14 .. - ~ ~ WW4 -...... , I . V. _. -1 1. --nI¢<~~1--1 .. _._ _,,_i,__ ___,__1______,E 16. 171 ~ ~ _i,_i__i .18 1..-ml9i'j'i92l*r»ii 3- ii _-I iggqiiajmto mpCovance in ' Denver, PA 92 1.'1'» :11-id! '-A_ .1;- -.. *1:'1"? i¬""é92! ,|'41Q_92 "-10» :4 lUi 121 92 !:>v I' 1 ,____M__A221 M__ 123,A _ A ,24, _ 1 25 » 1 i¢lf1,,1i',./- "1B2 -.m____.__;..7..,7_~,¢_f_,7_ '2111'1.11 ,-'_" T I92 I 1% 1" '-1 r, 1. 1'1811 ,-1'-£1 1 : __W 29 Q En; M "fm'éi 'f_i'__f ffmM""' " 92'T Hf r ._.-_..-..¢_¢...._...... -1-...... 4.»- __ 1 , > " -~= ' 5:5 - =-" . _-:==~'§ _-= Ea-1= ='2§,?} gr-_.-...-'-..-.-_~. :=a.+;-..u.- -».-=£u>¢;.-.-jg. - . - " T g:»5. ';§ - 5 - "-'-. =>.§.;;* §-'u;2,!-" ¢'- =:1$--'-~.>'. #.~.""~. :>-1-»:E_.-.:-:. ~ - . =~-:*£.t£=~@=.==-.,.-_:;, I;.-=#,..:;*- §",g-¢;.»-* *'* _" --='= - =.. '* . . .Ii;g~:'§='-"'-.=;':;"-".. --3 - L.-.-F- -=2:£ -.=- .1-.1-fl-'--.'= - |§'%"" -- ~¢&z%2x$@$ ¥E& - I-4-k-=<- <--""- " - '"' "-~~z:L~L~~1=-"5-I-& - "~ Tl--"' 2?-'&'~ "-=»'~.=:~.-"'-:-::.'.-;-it "-- - . £=- K -Si -:=.:--.~_-3,:-...-..---. - HERE IN Q.- z; _ ,~_,____.:-;__-_"-*._-__..-- _---4 ..;£3?;;.:=-.--;.»-.- '- ~ ~.-'=~':-:-.-.-:. .::. = .- -'= ==- U. S. D p?,rIem»'-.~; -,-: ~.--...-;...... __.- ._.% EPAR-I-MEN DATE l2 .I.El E;ElElEi " " -4.»; #¢-Q -'§1'§? ~" -'- +5"3= -' 5" -"'.':7;"ANIMAL T OF AGRICULTUR ~.--=- -1+. . .>'.* -E:"..:s """' . T. NATIOND 5: PLANT E ._,;. :2:-'= _§.-_'.::..-,~._'j, :»,__~ 7::-':':- .1.- -. -. _. Y -* - . EPEIY HEALTH INSPEC '1'£.__L_::: :"f_-__ -.|..'=_.-,-..~- ______.. . - _,_ _ .-. - .. AL VET TION SERVICES -.-.~'-*--:»':' '. ' ._ .. ERINA RY SERVICES LABORATORI '-?=-'.-":3-.-1 1. ~-.'.2;. POST .o|=:=|c:»: BQX 844 ES .. .. ._-." .--- -. .__..._ -__-_¢;;.. . - .- - __ ;__ -~;/,-,.=-:~~'-=~,--=:r:-.f. '7. '-_'-'. =.- * AMES' IOWA 50010 Posmes AND FEES PAID A IUNMD M55 MPARTMEW OF AGIZICULIURE U.$-MAIL OFFICIAL ausmsss AGR101 AS IFIED i- ' Penaltlfor Private Use $300 GU32-4 UII EA . - 1. < .._ ;92'-".5--'2 -' .- ...... U S mentof the '-:;..,04=. 1'E1_ _ - - Army MedicalArmy '1 ='»% .= ,2-=.*-H -Y-r :"-:-:::.¢."= .. ,_~<. ..'-92 _ :_-.~_-. _- _..' := ' w--"»'-.,=.-,~.. -..._r,;__-_ ~~ Hg . I -#4.:-'~ am /< ,--q.~_--<----- l'_'_-92-*1 .--_ - -- ~- - -_~-Pi. -IQ -~<- =-- r:.92'r,-.i'r1;r~»-~'- L; -*_'-.1-'-"H-""-029$ énfe ious D'ReSea' ¢h 1$@ases Institute .;.- -.92....,.,-_ :'..._:::: . " -_; DE..-,_..-_l=.,.v- '. P '. -_.-_._-{Z7- . L L ."t;;.-"- - .:,,l'.- ..-£7-» . ' 92 '|C _ .-.-.-,-<',_,~ :__.- -I." _ -. ,7; __ ~-.,. . G . .12 . .:--- ' '-- ..;-.-._..>__.< '._- .¢-,-... .-: ._,_ ...-- _ '..-.92- Maryland 21701 - -92. --.-< -- J -'~ ;; :"_j' _ -¢;"..92.> .-av-:42-, _ wag, . ,_ ._ .-1'-'-1.-92-#<. , ' ' . . -~n:492_._ . - ..-,..¢._....-._.~._»._= ..~, ~.=.~.,@=_--:s:,;-',-Z .- - re- Attni . ~.._ __ .... ,, _. .._-.._...->-=5;-- " ~~ 55%. ' <"?-.- L J i dv. ,. _¢92- . 92§-a _YL$'- ~ a7;.__ -_.;1 re-92,;--.:~¢ E-.'_:':.¢f _. ,_.-.,.:,_..--..-- -...-.;92-rq:-.92"-"7 T-_92 _-.--:,.92-_.-_'.a II-3! " _- '-.'-'..._ ...._.__.;._4p,-..> "-e ~ '.-»-:- ~.=__Y-1.-4- --- .v.-..-_-> <-:-u-::~;§_"-:~ -92-;- . -. - -. -92.".-~_-Q..-_.._ . ~au_':2.-'Y9293'1"'-.-....-4--._!~¢ . K -:--,_ - --- " '- ,.-... .-: 92- . -n _- 92-____.-_ I { ' -1 -_-I .:' -_' b6 3 -_ .._ -__-_.'.. :-*..- _ - -... .1 -o'3=~-_. J5 -E. :_....-at-y 1" Bacter '10] *H=- ,-:: §92.._ " -- .z.=¢<.--!,':f92=_-_ ~ ' _..~-'.-=-=-~.-,._92 ~ -3 ~---...-_.-" - ' ,__~___,_.._=_,=r_,>_-..._=_... .,._92_-....,._.,,_.._.-_ ,. _._... L" _-... ..__. . . _ _ _. ._ b7C -' Q It ' - -' -.--.-: ,' Thanks very much!!! ns [email protected] ORrS:Chemical Analysis Laboratory Page 1 of 3 '~y< ;<.-» .~~i -r UGA OVER GRS Directory J< ~:,> /__... i- ...,.>..<..l»-,~ . 92I92 .-.....92..- , 1 V, __..._...... M... . , ~~ . I A» A . '. can 2 i 1 ezass lN i £ l CAL Search ORSweb: i . :2 xvs..F~'i ,. . i7? Z7i :»-~~ ~ '7' " ~-=~-~ 7 -' J -7 3",? -- *3 "at": ,5» '"-" ?I~ ' * t S 4-l , _ " . 3:9 » .r"- *£ »~§.*.C." 3 -M ~ . ? > ' _~ s vi§£§{a§"" "' "9292;~924~~'92"fr~!;Y .-. -T 92~ 'Z92 '?~ 'i,""i~ - Y - Y" .. ~' "" »-vvv I 92- '3'.-; Yrs?i or Q if M "a fl. H ~.» 1 4: i;¢§g:»J<,,=& § ;';§3f_;f ;92§;;';:;$ ;_ZA=»t~- .; ," -Z?r3.2 ;..;¢,;.~. , i '~,;_ a4_1§ f;§*Z{'~ 92I*§;,;¬,;1»_';;_"¢, ;'92 3» . .-- 5~"j:=>~I5 I , A "rs om. tr . 2 _.--.9 .-_Q,92. ~1.=~' _ 1 ; < 92=~ ¢ Ma; I as . -..~ ;.__,.+ »;..-f 5fir s.,_. A __ ll A "'1'1 -'-If; t#1:"- ALL II1IFCl11'l'LitTIl3I1I CCIIJTAIIIIEIE '_".*4a*=n:ru _ _ 1 ¬%§el Ks,§§l*.¢$!i'§?!~4»'1é.¥$!$ it Home Chemical Analysts Laboratory HEFEIN I5 T_nJ,;;A55IFIEI, i ,m,umemmn,SeMceS pats 12-to-2i:oa at UII BI1.'uI_.~ l?!.S,- LEE Y- Shipping Samples Info The Chemical Analysis Laboratory offers the UGA 1 Analytical Prices . F Sample Preparations research community state-of-the art analytical H Staff ' t ~ J I Locator 692 <: v92 93* . i .{'%. w z ;%.:" »: l'5 ..,,.;_g; " -* at . < L r l *92'l'*¥1»vi"92¢ .' -zé metals, techniques. elements, and supportserv|ces,mcuding nutrients, . organic. i carbon, . anaysiso and I . f iggt gwx. -~ 1; , 1.: I 1 be <;f¬,f T; ~._.;~,, Q - - fl.g§*, 9292,,92~.»e,:. ; ,9, cations in a wide variety of samples. l wwr , In! ,-., 1 i I g; ~1 " rs. < -r w -'. __._ , » L, mt , < -Q ewrs, sci V . ", jv Z1 W, xe 51¢ J >v£~q92?J ~ ,, ;B92%a rye/><».H >5 ? Rebecca Auxler Our chemical analysis services are available £3, - e_,92,@'1; . ' I 2, 5»; .; ~ §.7.,;E~, Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry ICP-M5! Instrumentation: Thermo Jarrell-Ash Enviro 36 Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma spectrophotometer Inductively Analysis of solutions or dissolved solids Detection limits in the parts-per-billion to parts-per-trillion range Rapid, muiti-elemental analysis capability covering most elements in the periodic table Requires a minimum sample of 2 ml http://wWw.ca1.uga.edu/ /6/2005 Analysis Laboratory . . Page 2 of 3 Typical applications: To date, our lab has used this method to analyze protein, soil, water and plant samples. Other applications include detection of trace elements in a wide variety of aqueous matrices drinkingwater, river, lake and groundwater, waste water and ef uent, and seawater! in solids after digestion sediment,soil, sludge, road dust, air particulate matter, plant tissue and grain, rocks and minerals, etc.! and in samples of body uids blood,plasma, and urine! Instrumentation: Thermo VG Instruments PiasmaQuad 3 ICP-MS Atomic Absorption/Emission Spectrometry Analyses of solutions or dissolved solids for the presence of one or two speci c elements Detection limits in the pars-per-million to upper parts-per-billion range Requires a minimum sample of 25 ml Typical applications: proteins, plants, soils Instrumentation: Thermo Jarrell-Ash SH1000 Atomic Absorption/Emission Spectrometer HERBICIDE ANDPESTICIDE ANALYSIS Analysis requires a 1 ml sample Instrumentation: Finnigan/Trimetrics 9001 Gas Chromatograph Typical applications: plant material, soils, water INORGANICAND TOTAL DISSOLVEDORGANIC CARBON Determines the concentration of carbon dioxide as well as organic carbon in solution Requires a 10 ml sample minimum Instrumentation: O.I. Corporation Model 700 Total Organic Carbon TOC! Analyzer Typical applications: aquatic ecology to test the health of a body of water CARBON, HYDROGEN & NITROGEN ANALYSIS Rapid, simultaneous determination of total carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen content of non-aqueous samples Requires 1-3 mg of dry, ground plant or animal tissue and 200 mg of dry 18-40 mesh soils Instrumentation: Perkin-Elmer 2400 Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen Analyzer CHN! Typical applications: plants, soils, forestry, water, crystalline compounds,'seston, complex carbohydrates, and plastics NUTRIENT ANALYSIS Available chemistries are ammonia, chloride, nitrite, sulfate, ortho phosphate, alkalinity, total nitrogen and total phosphorus. _ Requires a 25 ml sample Instrumentation: Braun+Luebbe Auto Analyzer II Continuous Flow System Typical applications: water, wastewater OTHER SERVICES Other equipment includes a microwave digestion system, a freeze-dryer for iyophilizing tissue, and a jar mill for grinding samples for low-level metal analysis. The laboratory uses several EPA-approved and AOAC methods for preparation and analysis. 2005Office of Research Services at The University of Georgia ADivision of the Office of the Vice President for Research OVPR! ORSWeb Contact I Feedback http ://wWw.oal.uga.edu/ 5/6/2005 Fitzsi ons and Assoc- The complete lytical laboratory specializingin pol l , plastic, rubber,... Page 1of 2 --"T-.!..... =1 FIT ZSIMMOl§lS ' ALL IHFEIPJ-IATIUIII Elfll-I I'11I1IlE1T1 & 0 HIEIREIH IEO. DATE1.2-10-2006 1:" ICIILASSIFIED T I 50324111: BAIIIHREEL B1 CHEMKSAL ANALYSTS AND CONSULTANTS A _< .-_. x . I»-'?-,.,,-~f I "Eh a_ .. . 9E£"§__ ..-:1 92.-=.=.e_-=.=.; THE RIGHT STUFF - FOR PRODUCT QUALITY THE CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL LABORATORY FOR ANALYSIS OF ALL MATERIALS INCLUDING METALS, POLYMERS, RESINS, & RUBBERS. RV Fitzsimmons& Assoc.Inc. was foundedin 1974 and formore than 26 yearshas offeredits clients,many ofwhom are Fortune 500companies, laboratoryservices ofthe highestquality. Ourservices are uniquely designedto solvecomplex problemswhich areencountered in the manufacture a ofwide variety of products. lfyou browsethrough thiswebsite youwill get a good introductionto our methods andprices. 1 E Directory ofServices/Instrumentation i EPolymers & Plastics Rubbers & Resins V§A-92 Paints, Coatings & Adhesives Pharmaceuticals and Nutraceuticals ".1 Detect and Identify Trace Residues & Contaminants _Compositions of Mixtures & Formulations Forensic Laboratory Analysis Failure Analys_is , FITZSIMMONS & ASSOC., INC. 1860 Arthur Dr. , West Chicago,IL 60185 Phone: 30! 231-0680 Fax 1 30! 231-0311 ~ http://vvwwtherightstuff. coml 5/6/2005 Pageof 21 T f e C !IltaII1lIlaIltS. arr rrenrrn rnrnmmrrnn r_rn_.Lii..i.irFrrnIn r:n1m.:r1»1n riyrr 12-;0-sane Br etirsza UC B.§tItT_.#P.E,-"L?3C Detection & Identi cation of Trace Contaminants in Finished Products and Chemical Formulations This laboratory has devised manyunique methodsto detect and isolate trace impurities in nished products such as micro circuitryand a variety of other products wheretrace impuritiesinterfere withthe productsfunction. An example of this would be avery thin lm of oil residue onthe surfacesof micro switch contactswhich prevents goodelectrical contact.We have the abilityto identifythese residuesand help the clientdetermine their source. Chemical formulationsare oftenfound to contain lowlevels of impurities whichrender themunacceptable for use. A glass cleaner,for example,may leavean oily residue ora scouring compound maycontain lowlevels of an abrasive chemical which can scratch or mar a porcelain surface. We can determinetrace amounts of specificfuels in soils, wateror any material. Further,if a fuel containsa small amount of contaminant we will identify it and specify its content. Trace Contaminant & Residue Analysis ~ Cost Range 92 Volatile & Semivolatile Contaminants Detennined byheated headspace sampling followedby GC/MS analysis -$100 - 300 Surface Contaminants Surface residueswhich causepoor coating adhesion or bad electrical contact are solvent extracted andanalyzed bymicro FT-IR spectroscopy. $150- - 300 Trace Metal Impurities Determinedan by ashing of thesample followed l by acid digestion andatomic spectroscopyanalysis -$70 - 150 Home - Directory - Polymers - Rubbers- Paints- Pharmaceuticals Trace Contaminants- Compositions- Forensic- Failure Analysis http://WWW,therightstuff.com/ £race.html 5/6/2005 T* »='w.- u»- , t. .. -= . >~.~. _ . . Page 1 of 2 Fgrensic Analysis ALL HEREIN Ia IIiTFZl¬I-Li<.TIUI1I:l5ElItTT§i.II~TEDl,TlJlILiL§iLIFIED [FATE 12-10-2000 ET SD32-5L UC BMiT.fR§.i; L§.i|I R.V. Fitzsimmons & Associates uses the latest State of the Art instrumentation for the detection of trace substances which provide the key information needed to solve problems ranging from malfunctions of micro circuitryto the identi cation of trace volatileorganic residues found at suspected explosion and arson re sites. Micro FT-lR techniques have been perfected in this laboratory to identify trace lm, powder and ber contaminants which affect the function of electrical circuits or prevent the adhesion of paints or electroplatings to metal or plastic surfaces. GC/MS GasChromatography/Mass Spectroscopy! methods are the majortools of a good forensiclaboratory. This lab has used these techniques to " ngerprint" fuels for their identification in re site debris and chemical spill locations. Also we have perfected -** methodsfor heated head space separation of volatile and semi volatile organics for purity checks of chemicals and for detection of contaminants in food and food packaging materials. High Performance Liquid Chromatography HPLC!is still another method we have used to detect and identify trace contaminants in food products, body creams and lotions. Examples of Forensic Analysis and Cost Estimate Isolation of trace surface residues and identi cation by Micro FT-IR - $300 Separation of micro particles and bers and identi cation by Micro FT-IR - $250 Trace volatile and semivolatile organic contaminants in solids and liquids by heated head space methods followed by identi cation and quantitation by GC/ MS - $300 Detection of speci c contaminants in foodstuffs or personal care products by HPLC or GC/MS methods. - $350 ' Detection of contaminant vapors in the workplace air at ppb levels - $300 Home - Directory - Polymers - Rubbers - Paints - Pharmaceuticals Trace Contaminants - Compositions - Forensic - Failure Analysis h Et'0I//WWw. '1eri ohfshtffcom/fnrensic.l1'rm §/6/ O§ Tristrjaightls handwritingan Dope:a "s legit science? Page 1 OT3 5 A »<¢£- ; -.< ~ Q ALL II-IFDPEHATIDI-I =30:-rr.t11r.r:p ~IQ i 11;; §» 1= V; k3i_:_1 ': .2 :.,,_=._. *'i .~- =; . ,3 5; ~ _z 3.;,= 5, I r. 5 1 HEFIEIIJ ,. ..1..UI~]CL1~1.:-.aIFIE[.~ 1.», . 5 A; <2», '11 ,; 1. .- , f a _.;* .1» T ,1 " 5 *1 7 -,?* is ii. 5% . 1 DAE 12-to-zoneBY 50324UC EAIIL- R3.-"LEE 1_ I r ' ,_ _ ~ F. ' 2; » u i; .<3 2 - } ., 1. 1 J: 7 i.1 I ' - Q Q *3 U . ». _ . l . . . s " > ;'.'1 1rti > ~ 1 ; -& * ' --'3, H _: . -J.- .' =. 4; _' _ 5. I H z , i »;.., 5 -,4 , , A ti 1. 1- w 3': > ~ 2, 1- .- - ~ ..~'-1 -, ».~ + ,- _,.~<, ~- ~,-; , 5 .;-A:_ . '12 , , 1 , ~ ~- >1 .~ .-A ,..= <» JY '-'~-.w r 2 _T - ~ - ~ -..~;t,2' -r~'1 o '., lj "-3 _92_ fa ,5 1 '~ ifij § .. 1-4<'»- ->- ~'><~~ ~"~" ~ -"92f"- '~ ""7" ...""_°" " _l' A " ' '; " ' t >1- [ HomePage I MessageBoards Newsl Archive| |AskCecil | Books | BuyStuff | FAQs,etc.] [ PreviousWeek | Recent Columnsindex] ls handwriting analysis legit science? 18-Apr-2003 v Dear Cecil: /-"""~ M-92 What'sStraightDope onhandwriting the 5;? l knowthat analysis? ¬£" T:}l Q, !92_ <§ -" "" ' musthandwritingsomething beto testimonyit. experts But have bea lhard canacceptedtime in court, sothatbelieving a thereET 11¢, ,-$.13TQo6 smart criminalwouldn't able be to change hiswriting toavoid detection. a Onrelated issue, canan "expert"really tellsomethirig _ aboutpersonality your your fromhandwriting e.g., loops that in J 81+ Yourand 9'sindicate Y'sa high sex drive!?If thatwere ittrue, Y; _""' would seemthat one'shandwriting wouldchange fromday today, which it doesn't. --Kristinin Sausalito, California Cecil replies: At first this question mightseem likea great opportunity layto outthe differencebetween scienceand pseudoscience. theOn onehand wehave forensichandwriting analysis,in which an expertdecides whether twoor more samples were writtenby thesame person,e.g., whethera signature was forged.On theother we have graphology,in which some sage triesto divine a subject'spersonality traitsfrom hisor herhandwriting. While graphologyenjoys aboutthe sameprestige as palm reading, forensichandwriting analysishas helped send peopleto jailsince the days of theLindbergh kidnapping.But inthe eyesof thelaw, the credibility of such analysis ison thewane. Thanksto a landmark Supreme Courtruling inthe early90s, more and morefederal judges aredeciding that while forensic handwritinganalysis maynot bequackery, it'snot exactly science either. http://vvvvw.straightdope.com/columns/030418.html 5/10/2005 1} le straightDope: handwriting ls analy'bgitsciencei? Page 2 01°3 meta-analysis200 scientificstudies ofgraphology of Geoffery Dean by A. inrwished TheWrite Stun? /a/uarions of Grapho/ogy» TheStudy of Handwriting Analysis, edited by Barry L. Beyerstein and Dale F. ayerstein, PrometheusBooks, 1992!found thatit wasworthless asa predictor of personality.That hasn't evented peoplewho oughtto knowbetter fromrelying onit. ln France, anestimated 70percent of ampanies usegraphology when making hiring decisions. Between 5 and 10 percent of U.S. and UK Jmpanies do so.! Law enforcement authorities sometimes turn to graphology and kindred techniques when 'ofiling criminals,as in the case of the D.C. sniperlast_.fall. Butsuch methodsare oftenthe lastresort of police esperate to appear to be doing something. There'sone only well-documented case of a bad guy actually eing caught by a profile--George Metesky, the "l92/lad Bomber of New York City in the 1940s and '50s--and he ras nabbed less because of his handwriting than because he'drevealed too many clues about his past in a . atter to a newspaper. tor along time forensichandwriting analysisseemed morerespectable, butits statushas beenshaky since i993, whenthe SupremeCourt handeddown itsruling in Dauberfv. Merrell DowPharmaceuticals. Previously he chiefcriterion forthe admissibilityof expert testimony had beenwhether itwas basedon techniques 'generally accepted by scientists. Daube/rgave federal judges much greater discretion in deciding admissibility.lt suggested they consider ! whether a theory or techniquecan betested, ! whether it'sbeen subject topeer review, ! whether standards existfor applyingthe technique,and ! the technique'serror rate. Sounds reasonable,eh? ButDaubertcreated anuproar, becausethe dirtylittle secretof much so-called expert testimony wasthis: thoughit was possible inprinciple totest andvalidate mostforensic techniques,in many cases no one had ever doneso. in 2002 onejudge evenrestricted testimonybased onfingerprint analysis, saying hewas unconvincedthe techniquewas a science rather thana mix of craft and guesswork. No forensictechnique hastaken morehits thanhandwriting analysis.in one particularly devastatingfederal ruling, UnitedStates v.Sae/ee 001!, the courtnoted thatforensic handwritinganalysis techniqueshad . seldom beentested, andthat whattesting hadbeen done raises seriousquestions aboutthe reliabilityof methods currentlyin use. The expertswere frequentlywrong--in onetest "thetrue positiveaccuracy rateof laypersons wasthe sameas thatof handwritingexaminers; bothgroups werecorrect 52 percent ofthe time." The mostbasic principlesof handwritinganalysis--for example,that everyone'shandwriting isunique~-had never beendemonstrated. "Thetechnique of comparing known writingswith questioneddocuments appearsto be entirelysubjective andentirely lackingin controllingstandards, thecourt wrote. Testimony bythe government's handwritingexpert wasruled inadmissible. 9292 Prosecutors scramblingto find scientific validationfor handwritinganalysis last.year touteda studyby Sargur Srihari,a professor of computerscience atthe StateUniversity ofNew Yorkat Buffalo.Srihari subjected1,500 writing samplesto computeranalysis. Conclusion:ln 96 percent ofcases, thewriter ofa sample could be positively identifiedbased on quantitative featuresof his handwriting suchas letterdimensions andpen pressure. Skepticsobjected thatlab resultsusing acomputer prove nothingabout whata human can doin the l real world,and whocan argue?lf experttestimony is going to sendpeople upthe river,it betterbe morethan t http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030418.html 5/10/2005 Thé'S [|;§lQh'£ls handwriting a ,/sis science?legit Dope: Page 3 of3 some mope sprejudices dressedup as science. CECIL ADAMS [Comment on this answer] Cecil Adamscan deliverthe StraightDope onany topic.Write Cecilat [email protected]. _ ANOTHER EPOCHALPUBLISHING EVENT!Cecil's gift latest tomankind, Triumphof the Sfra/Qghz isDope, in the bookstoresnow andcan alsobe orderedon-line atthe StraightDope On-LineStore. Forbook detailsclick here. ' [ PreviousWeek | Recent Columns Index] The StraightDope I Questions or commentsfor CecilAdams to:[email protected] Comments regardingthis websiteto: [email protected] n For advertising information,see theChicago ReaderOnline RateSheet Copyright 2003Chicago Reader,lnc. Allrights reserved. No materialcontained thisin sitemay berepublished repostedor withoutexpress writtenpermission. The StraightDope isa registered trademark Chicagoof Reader,inc. http://www.straightdope.com/columnslO30418.html 5/10/2005 LIMA:Handwriting: Forensic and S ly Handwriting Analysis Pageof2 1 & ALL II-IFD » TICII-I CIZI-TTEIIIJED _ - - - - I-IEREII Ia i.lIlIEL£s.5SIFIEII92 LIMA. Forensic Handwriting Analysis mm , 2_.,]_,m ... r.| 5.. 6,3324J. UC M, A Handwriting analysis has the unusual distinction of being an area of interest in both literature departments and forensic science. Professional forensic document examiners have produced a very substantial body of work, of which I only scratch the surface. Book length introductions to forensic document examination include: I Wilson R. Harrison, Suspect Documents: Their Scienti c Examination, 2nd edition London,1966! I Roy A. Huber and A. M. Headrick, Handwriting Identification: Facts and Fundamentals Boca Raton, FL, 1999! n Ron Morris,Forensic Handwriting Identi cation: Fundamental Concepts and Principles London,2000! I An extensive .Biblio_graphy of Forensic Handwriting Analysis is available online. This was produced by Tom Davis, whois both an academic in the English Department of Birmingham University, and a professional document examiner. One issue that forensic handwriting analysts often confront is the possibility of _io_r_gg"_y. LEVELS OF PROOF AND THE RELIABILITY OF HANDWRITING ANALYSIS Comparing samplesof handwriting does not necessarily give a straightforward unambiguous result. Uncertainties about what may be a style characteristic, the quality of the samples, and the likely degree of variation, means there is often a degree of uncertainty. So how fallible is handwriting analysis? Handwriting analysis comes under scrutiny when it is used as evidence in court. Tom Davis has written an article on Forensic Handwriting Analysis in Britain, which describes the level of care in accumulating and presenting evidence, and attention to wording in summarising conclusions, which is demanded of the expert witness. More systematic attention has been paid to the methodological basis of handwriting analysis in the USA, where in 1993 the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, which set new criteria for the admissibility of scientific evidence, later expanded to include all expert opinion testimony. The Supreme Court formulated a set of factors about proposed testimony that a presiding judge should consider in order to determine "the scientific validity and thus the evidentiary relevance and reliability of the principles that underlie a proposed submission." These factors include: ' 1. Whether the theory of technique can be and has been tested. 2. Whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer review and publication. 3. The known or potential rate of error. 4. The existence and maintenance of standards controlling the technique's operation. 5. Whether the theory or technique is generally accepted within the relevant scientific community. Evidence must be shown to meet these criteria before it can be presented in court. The ruling placed considerable pressure on handwriting analysis to prove that it was a genuine form of expertise according the Daubert criteria. Some years previous to the Daubert ruling, D. Michael Risinger, Mark P. Denbeaux, and Michael J. Saks published an article with the striking title, Exorcism of Ignorance as a Proxy for Rational Knowledge: the Lessons of Handwriting Identification Expertise"', University of Pennsylvania Law Review,137 989!, 731-92. It accused handwriting analysis of being a pseudo-expertise, its practitioners of being reluctant to allow their work to be tested independently, and of failing to show an acceptable level of accuracy in the few empirical studies that had taken place. Handwriting analysts have responded to these challenges in a number of ways. There have been further tests on the reliability of analysts conclusions. An interesting study highlights the problem of false matches: Moshe Kam, Gabriel Fielding, Robert Conn, Writer Identification by Professional Document Examiners , Journal of Forensic Sciences, 42 997!, 778-86. Kam et al. conducted a test on both professionally trained handwriting analysts, and a control group. The study revealed a statistically significant difference in preponderance to make type I errors falsematches!. All - groups performed roughly equally in detecting matches, doing so about 88 per cent of the time; however the wrong association rate of non-professiona/s was about 38 per cent - compared to under 7 per cent among professionals. This difference may well be linked to the methodological difference noted before: professionals start by looking for differences http://www2.wan/vick.ac.uklfac/arts/ren/publicationsllima/handwritinglforensicl 5/10/2005 l LlMA:,l-vlandwritingzForensicSc'1rly and Analysis Handwriting Q Page 2 of2 between samples, non-professionals tend to base their conclusions on similarities. We would do well to bear these results in mind when assessingpublished analyses. Another interestingrecent development,and onethat gives supportto its objective testability,is thedevelopment of computer technologiesfor handwriting analysis known as FISH!, which are based onthe fact that a unique set of algorithms canbe generatedby performingcertain measurementson anindividual's handwriting.Work on handwriting individuality hasbeen done by TheCenter for Excellence inDocument Analysis and Recognition CEDAR!,and their findings can be found on their website, where you can even try out a Handwriting Verification Test. CEDAR claim that theircomputerised analysiscan correctlyidentify anindividual's handwritingwith 98% accuracy whenthere isan adequate sample. l There hasnot beena consistent decision byjudges overwhether handwritinganalysis meets the Daubert criteria.Some judges, suchas in a 1999 ruling in Massachusetts thisand othercase reportsare foundon www.forensic- l evidence.com!, haveallowed testimonyabout dis!similarity,but notconclusions aboutauthorship. TheMass. judge noted thatbecause an individual's handwriting varieseach timehe orshe writes unlike, say,a ngerprint!, analysis depends ona judgement of similitudethat is ultimately subjective.Although anexpert s experiencemakes thembetter quali ed thana lay-person to nd similarities, thisexpertise didnot givethem anyadditional qualificationto makethe next step identificationof authorship.This wastherefore left to the jury. Thejudge did notaccept thatstudies suchas Kam's establishedhave thevalidity of the field . ; Other rulings, however, havegiven greatercredence torecent studiesof handwritinganalysis andseen greater significancethe in extensiveprofessional trainingof expert analyts, andso manyjudges haveaccepted thatthe discipline E meets theDaubert criteria.The expertise of thosewho haveattempted todiscredit handwritinganalysis egRisinger, Denbeaux andSaks, noneof whomare themselvestrained inhandwriting analysis!has alsocome intoquestion. For l example seea 1999 case repgt, and especiallythe 2002 Prime , and the similar 2003 Thornton cases. l THE RELEVANCE OF FORENSIC ANALYSIS T0 SCHOLARLY ANALYSIS l Since thevast majorityof workon handwritinganalysis comesfrom theforensic field,it is clearly usefulfor'anyone dealing withquestioned handwritingto have some awareness forensicof work.However thereare significantdifferences l between the fields. - For example,forensic documentexamination hasconsiderably moreresources availablethan doesresearch inthe humanities, andfew ofthose whopublish onhandwriting the in humanitiescan,be consideredprofessional analysts.The levels ofrigour foundin forensicscould notpossibly be sustained in the research environmentof the humanities. More importantstill isthe differencein theburden ofproof. Inthe Anglo-Americancriminal justic_esystem, proofmust be > established beyondreasonable doubt,but can we reallyexpect a bibliographer,historian, literaryor scholarbe expected to meetthe samecriteria ofproof? Thereis a great deal moreat stakein a criminal case thanin anacademic article,so it issurely reasonableto expect more rigorousdemands. No onegoes toprison onthe basisof abadlyargued academic article. r - K Scholarshipthe in humanitiesdoes notproceed onthe basisof establishingits claimsto thenon-specialist beyond reasonable doubt;it is rathera matter of positinga viable hypothesis a tospecialist audience, whomto itwill be accepted thein absenceof anyviable alternative.This demandsa lower level ofproof. Aclassic exampleisthe general but notuniversal! acceptanceof "Hand D" asShakespeare's. would This notstand upin a law court, butwith the support ofother alsoinconclusive! lines ofevidence, andin theabsence ofa more convincing alternative,it has been sufficient toconvince a majority of thescholarly community. It is reasonable accept to cautiously- a scholarlyidentification handwritingof whichdepends ona balance of probability. Howeverthe scrutiny which forensicanalysis hasundergone shouldhelp usto maintaina healthy scepticism about handwritingidentification, especiallywhena document is simplyasserted beingas ina given person's handwriting without the basis of this identi cation being made clear. http://vWvw2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/ren/publications/limalhandwritlnglforensicl 5/10/2005 71M/%anL j__HandWritingE! pe|wltl'leSSGSConsultants ExpertsExpert - Pile& Pageof2 1 ' 1* u ~ 1' ~ """'"~ F "'~:Tr1 f72 JZ~ SG1-= :=~ ~ 1» :t " 92 -T 7*'Y *?'?? . " " "° . """Q1 ???' T """ "T3 ?"T "§""" '3?'5'T"Z§7'§'s§ §75~' -3~ ' ' . 0 .4 ? rii l1 3 .4IT71517 =~5£ 5 ?r* ?'»f$3 :3 ft: 7 ti' J . 1? Z. I 3 ..~H . ~» *5 1 " v-~~ 5'3:-»@~J'~"- =1-» M '5=-1" ?~ -"Pf":-'-=2" . _ " i ' - ' » ... _vwA924QI'~ ~.§~ ~-92 t .. : A:-:41-t¢¢t.a>~-_ » -.~._~. sea .--<<§§.;-'o».'»..<92 *~~~.:P~$-u92$~v'A%o92 __s, <.a. . _ ~92. .92~. *..,.. 92 _ 5-. I 92 t.. " N .. -> r ~' 92 rrsr . , , , _ I E 92 " .. I in-...... _...,.,.1> 7 *'» >- . wage;rgK;g§r:~§ ,~,_ -1 ~» 1»~~v. _:,, .;< Z:x t" , 1 if ..,.. . '.3 g" "" !' _ * ,_ 7, __.. '" ... . '_P92_ '3.- X - 1-" -;._ .$ - -5. . . . 1-. _-_-,.' " ,-,,' _, , . i;_:,jl_:_ __A..4{-,7_t: Maryland experts& expertwitnesses - Expertsin the identi cation of handwriting, handprinting and signaturesto determine authorship. Serveas expert witnessesand forensicconsultants in Marylandlegal matters, and provide expert reportsand testimonyfor judges, attorneys, lawyers,law rms, insurance companiesand governmentagencies inFederal andstate court trials and arbitratlons In Maryland. View All Topics | Go to Home Page | To choose a different state, please use your browser's backbutton. L?- -Accessto ExpertPages is subject to our Terms and Conditions of Use. Useof any information on ExpertPages for marketing or solicitation is strictly prohibited. Dennis J.Ryan - Forensic Document ExaminerlMerrick, NY Conductsexams in all aspectsof ForensicDocument Examination,including: Handwriting,Typewritten Documents,Photocopier & Paper Examinations, Writing Media,Obliterations Alterations.& Providesstate-of-the-art DigitalCourtroom Presentations. E Send Email] Visit WebSitel Click Here forExpert WitnessPhone Numbers Richard Orsiniand Associates,inc. -Richard Orsini,MS, DABFE,CDE /JacksonvilleBeach, FL . Court-qualified, Board-certifiedDocument Examiner,specializing inHandwriting Identificationand BehaviorPro ling. Servicesalso include altereddocuments, andguest speaker/workshops. 54] SendEmail | Visit WebSite | Click Here for Expert WitnessPhone Numbers Forgery Forensics c! - Renee C. Martin lPrinceton,NJ s Over 50years solid experience in all phases ofDocument Examination,with specialExpertise inForgery. El Send Email| Visit WebSite I Click Here for Expert WitnessPhone Numbers Document Consultants- Carolyn Kurtz /Southampton,PA Board certifiedand court-qualifiedForensic DocumentExaminer, specializingin Signatures, Handwriting identi cation,Medical Records, AnonymousLetters, Wills,Deeds, TypewriterComparison, DecipheringText, andrelated services. E Send Email] Visit WebSite | Click Here forExpert WitnessPhone Numbers Communique DocumentExaminers -Julie C. Edison I McLean,VA Handwriting Expert,Document Authentication,Questioned Wills,Anonymous Letters,Checks Printed& Forms.Member, independent AssociationQuestioned of DocumentExaminers IAQDE!& American College ofForensic Examinersinternational ACFEI!. § Send Emaill Visit WebSite| Click Here forExpert WitnessPhone Numbers Handwriting Associates- Peggy M. Kahn, MA, CG I Westport,CT Document Examination,Personnel Selection,Expert Witness.Court-certified. Over15 years experience. onCV request. Eel SendEmail | Click Here forExpert WitnessPhone Numbers Vickie L.Willard Board -Certi ed BFDE, AFDE!- Forensic Document ExaminerICleveland, OH Forensic documentexamination servicesinclude handwritingidentification, signaturecomparison, alteredand fraudulentrecords, other http://expertpages.com/experts.ph p/handwriting_experts_maryland.htm 5/10/2005 _ _ HandwritingExpeiwitnesses ExpertsConsultants - Expert & Pie Page 2 2of r issues relatingto questioneddocuments. Testimonygiven instate andfederal courts.More than 27 yearsof experience. E3 Send Email I Visit WebSite I Click Here for Expert WitnessPhone Numbers - Speckin Forensic Laboratories - Erich J. Speckin IOkemos, Ml Speckin ForensicLaboratories conductsmore DocumentExamination casesthan any other privatelaboratory inthe world.This includes inkDating, MedicalRecords, andHandwriting Examinations. 3 Send Email I Visit WebSite IClick Here for Expert WitnessPhone Numbers Robert J. Phillips & Associates - Robert J. Phillips, Forensic Document Examiner lAudubon, NJ Former GovernmentAgent. Over30 years experience, with over 500 courtappearances in10 states.Graduate, USSecret Service; Questioned Documents Course; member, lAl. ES] SendEmail I Visit WebSite I Click Here for Expert Witness PhoneNumbers Mader HandwritingExaminers W.J. Mader,- BCFE ILittleTorch Key,FL Handwriting &Signature Comparisons,Forgeries, andGraf ti. Court-quali ed. Con dential, freefirst appointment. §Se d n mai E l I isi V 'tWe itebS I Click Here for Expert Witness Phone Numbers Forensic Document Solutions - Larry Ziegler I Berkeley Springs, wv Larry Zieglerretired FBI,Secret Sen/iceand immigrationand NaturalizationForensic DocumentExaminer specializingin handwriting indenti cation and the review of immigrationdocuments. Qualifiedin State and Federal Courts. E Send Email I Visit WebSite I Click Here for Expert WitnessPhone Numbers Robertson investigations - Michael Robertson /North Canton, OH Retired SecretService Agent.Over 200Testimonies. OhioSupreme Courtapproved myCLE Coursefor Ohio Attorneys. Testi edas Expert before Congressional Ethics Committee in 2002. 51 Send Email I Visit WebSite IClick Here for Expert WitnessPhone Numbers §' Clickto See All ExpertListings worldwidein thisCategory Home I Siqnup I Get Listed I Contact Us I About Us I Terms and Conditionsof Use I Expert Articles I,Expert WitnessesI Medical Experts I All Topics I Search Expert Pages®is a registered trademark. ExpertPages.comis a unit of © 1995 - 2005 For InformationContact -admin@expert|gages.com - 15! 331-1212.IMPORTANT NOTICE:By accessingExpertPages, visitorrepresents &warrants that his/her use is for purposes ofretaining an expert or evaluating thissite and agrees that s/he will NOT use any information on ExpertPages or links therefrom for marketing or RFLIABIUTYsolicitation. Information on this site has been providedby the persons listedand althoughportions mayhave beenverl ed by ExpertPages, users should alwaysindependently verifythe quali cations and backgroundof any expert. ExpertPagesand its affiliates disclaimall responsibilityfor the PROGRAMaccuracy orcompleteness ofthe listings. Please also see our ggngigjgns of Use agg Disclaimer and our Erivacy Egligy. Need Legal Forms? B BB Onliml Visit our Forms §i§§. We also include links to other law related sites. These pages wereautomatically updatedas of Tuesday May10, 2005. http://expertpages.com/experts.php/handwriting_experts_maryiand.htm 5/10/2005 y fdwriting___. _ ___|_handwriting Experts,graphology,witness, angels, 7 examiner, expert documentPageof 3 for...1 ~G~lri~é:-k-o~nes~of»thesfor a refergl links to a qualified handwritng expert in your area or get trained in handwriting analysis. J U1iIl_LA..|.:-]IFIEI.92 DATE J.2 l0 2EIOEi BY 155324 UC E:ii.T_|I£'RS_r'L¬" Scroll down and choose between thefollowing websites dependin on your needs. Q i -. ask . r < - ' s _ ' t 3 Yfl, s~= '1! "Rwa- _ W ya ~ .. 1 ~*=we -I ._ **- w-;e=~= 5; ..;v_~f_A - N; . / -r" §.:- -- ,' W , .¢ . ,.-= _. . -." fs~. §92»; splvingtoqr HandwritingRelated Pxobiqizaeg I have a forgery and Expert Document Examiner.com want to hire Cu r t Baggett - court Curt Baggett - Founder of Handwriting qualifed docume nt University's Schoolof Forensic Document examiner. Examination and Court Qualified Expert WitnesS 1. Forgeries, questioned documents, court cases 92§. NG Se .,~ ,; I have a forgery and E ,5 : ; need to hire a court : '>~¢ .". = .1 . qualifed document 4, v- examiner. /1°N A1 /P92°$ Handwriting ServicesInternational I want to hire a analyst to give m certifiedinsight handwriting into the personality based Y a handwritingon sample. Handwriting Analysisfor Personality Profiling I wa nt to learn th B 1 #<='§ §<§3§~! ~»._-92 -" v :":~S*: 92hQ3 ix 6 %*si *§2;>. . Z?" ""§':jg§.¥§r 92{ 1A92- ,.t~1.'-3_x,4- ~.~ pg rv~~.92<~_r §r {égf'iZ:§as='_<;= gearE-$Tf:'3; science of K3? 3<~*e¥';;;;.-f**s*=92¥f ~,:< *i'"=i;": :=¢>: ,-31 §¢.> * :s=;;$i" » §".92 i¥.%¢r , /55¢. i - :;i!_,,¢;iZ.,}>.!.¥>',;.=:i£7{~?:~;.,,~§}t.-t», , ,. ,,1'§:Y-gr,» understanding 1,...W53? 9*, . _ . - .> _ __ . s . -= f personality from _ handwriting. HandwritingUniversity.com Get certified,home studycourses, seminars, http://www.handwritingexpertscoml 5/10/2005 Vidwritinghandwriting Experts,graphology,expert witness,anat is,doaient for... examiner,2 Page 3of Z ll f n trainings.ll ! / Please visitthe ab0 v be wes it esfor allyour graphology,ihandwriting analysis,and documentexamining needs. toLearn bean expert, get certi ed, have buy fun,a book, watch a video, see celebrity handwriting sainplesand much,much, more. iandwriting expert.document examiner bvrapholo y D ,:, vra holooia'p D , 3 erap h 0 1ogie, ,,rapho-analyisis,1'0'' handwritin<> badanalysis, checkfo" 'f <1 expert witness,court testimony, c. hot l~ 100 l<, 01 f ' ge-cl check,testimony,- D handwritingexpert,' s, igeiy,' 8.11 Recommended Students: qihttp :Wwwhandwritingexperts.c01n/arniette "5 http:www.handwritingexperts,co1n/bob '*- http:wWw.handwritingexperts.com/ten"y '34http:www.l1anclwritingexperts.com/jay J://www.handwritingexpertscoml 5/10/2005 . Wrmng cxperrs, nanowrmng analysis, grapnology, expen Witness, clocument examiner, Tor... Page J5 or Li l f,m h:ctp:www.handwritingexpe1Ts.co'hn_ 0 M S $*http:92v92v92v.haudWriti1:1ge: Q*httpzwwwhandwritingexperts.com/curt Forgegg Information 1ttp:/lwww.handwritingexperts.com/ 5/10/2005 TDOC.L.l ENTS_ ANA|_,YS|S,:LlNGUliCS,HANDWRITING Experts-DOQMENTS-ANALY... Pagei of2 no _ "1_ ;;=;_g?:i>? ff T*"j__ L_._Ir-IFl3mr_l.TIlJI-1 l.l:l1-IT.l.:1rE;l v g A _, , - _<~ V ~ T|lEililJ > *:?i |Ui3t il'i iEf llEi -7IlI.}i§§$i§§-El l3ii"et:t'l:r"l,l il1'= |5- i- E" ¢ ]*m-1-E; _]_3_lg_~'l-mg 1:-3 UIlIIL;1s.5HIFIEIIl ]§:r,r 5|j;33<~1 _ '* _ . __, -;C]_16k',. 'H9I9lt0"i'E1Hd; r ' S '" 4' " ' 4' ' C ° |-|¢,-ne Store Join Expert Login TermsIPoIicy i F q |-°9°"i Find an Expert by "keyword" Location: Submit To search by category: iDOC9l§4§bl..I§;£:92H/il-ll if92",Re9J° $ - 3 i DOCUMENTS - ANALYSIS, LINGUISTICS, HANDWRITING EXPERTS ' lNV|¬|g_I[:ll§ §;- !!é|ORCentral Assignments Division. Florida Investigators Serving Major MetroU.S. Cities. Staffed by Former Federal Agents. Full Range of Investigative Services avaiable to Corporations, Law Firms & Qualified individuals. 888!844-4887 Rita M. Lord, BCFE " "@ American Document Examiners W_e$1__BlO0__._m eld Ml Board-certified Expert Witness for Federal, Probate, Circuit, and District courts. Forensic Document Examiner specializing in: Handwriting ID, Alterat... Rita M. Lord, BCFE "" 'E°! American Document-Examiners R Board-certified Expert Witness for Federal,Probate, Circuit, and District courts. Forensic Document Examiner specializing in: Handwriting ID, Alterations, Obliterations, Number ID, and Forgeries. Ms, Barbara Downer " ;-D Discovery Handwriting Services Oxford K5 Board Certified Court Quali ed, Forerisic Document Examiner, specializing in: Forensic document examination, forensic photography, criminal pro ling, iury selection, and expert testimony. 92 Bonnie Lee Nugent ""'@ l Rowe MA Expert document examiner, specializing in the comparison of hand written, printed, numbered documents. Available for: wills, medical records, anonymo... RuthHolmes "'"@ Pentec lnc. Bloom eld llllls Ml Pentec lnc offers professional services including: handwrittlng analysis, document analysis, forgery research, signature verification and trial consulting. Jane B. Eakes, CDE ~r'@ Script Dynamics, lnc. Nash.ville,_T.N Certi ed Document Examiner Ms. SharonE. Ottinger ""@ ExpertWitness.Com iatd Regional Sales Manager Ms, Jeanette |__ Hunt "'":@ Jeanette L. Hunt &Associates San Antonio TX 15yearsas a forensic document examiner. Certified Document Examiner by National Association of Document Examiners, a Board Certified Forensic Docume... Renee C_ Martin @ Forgery Forensics, Division of QDI Princeton NJ Renee C. Martin, Board ~ Certified Forensic Document Examiner, Diplomate of American College of Forensic Examiners and the National Association of Document Examiners. ' Kay Micklitz * @ Alamo Area Forensic Labs semi Kay Micklitz is a board certified, court qualified, forensic document examiner. David S. Moore "mg Moore Document Laboratory e Fair Oaks CA Over25 years of forensic document examination experience with the California Department of Justice, the Las Vegas Metro Crime Lab, the US Postal lttp://www.expertwitness.com/form/list_by_cat.phtml?categoryld=106.htm| A 5/10/2005 ANALYSIS,HANDWFi|TlNG LlNGUlS$CS,- DO3l92/IENTS- /-92r921AL§r.i.. .~ '0Experts 2 2or Page Reed SimpsonF, WE ; Computer/Legal Consultants,lnc. _ L@ 39 yearsexperience a specialist as in computerand Internettechnology a withfocus on project management,software systemsimplementation, data base design and computernetwork systemsarchitecture. Dr. RichardVan Leer " -E9 EnterprlT.com Corporation i information Technology39 years. Expert Consultant for defensein criminalSPAM trials;Jeremy Jaynes,Richard Rotkowski,Jessica DeGrootvs. State of Virginia, AOL. Mr. DavidMariasy *'*@ Team AudioInc. credo T on We provideidentification, acoustical& media forensic services.We recover, enhance& extract info frommedia. Weoffer transcriptions,biometric voice identi cation, & evidence management. 92 Mr.Todd Stefan '*"@ Setec investigations assg Setec Investigationsoffers unparalleledexpertisecomputerforensics in electronic and discovery,providing highlypersonalized, case-specificforensicM analysis and litigation support services. 1 Steve Cain '".@ E Applied ForensicTechnologies lnc. lnt'| Lake Geneva WI 20 yearsexperience inexamining audioandlor videotapes forthe U.S.Department ofJustice Curt Baggett*' @ Richard o TX Over 25years ofexpert witnessexperience court - qualifiedhandwriting expertfor forgeries- documentexaminer DOCUMENTS -ANALYSIS, LINGUISTICS,HANDWRITING EXPERTS If you can'twhat nd your looking for! Try using a broader keyword search Copyright_ ExpertW|tness.c0m 2002_ Rights_ Click Reserved All Visithereto sisterour view our §wu%_e_&s:mm_andSues _L_ea_|_D_'_$g_la,ig_1_e_r1or __ol'_ Ei|n§éxn5j': §g% Eyfyac v http://wwwexpertwitness.com/form/Iist_by_cat.phtml?category|d=106.htm| 5/10/2005 Ele ItentaiAnalysis ALL Irrrclpmrrorr:orm.InEr» Page 1of 1 M_ j,ra__.;_~"-]i:1Ti F;;;»~i ' ~:"v* . "it 3:iilgeergi-; Elemental Analysis ;:»"3;"92 _¢ -, as ~' iii "T" .1 2? i " *3 ~u ," ?1-" *:Y £§i 3;. té Laboratory detection,identi cation and quantification ofelements insample matrices. i £ .?*;Z7»'._ ,-s=c»--92-ml»--> " ' lntertek elementalanalysis labsoffer afull rangeof Elements. Elemental compoundsand Elemental __ .7_ ...,,.<,:.~ ..' :'. .§<. ,_-=o Zg:'§ : ~', lzggrsgttfwzqg testing solutionsfor clients requiring identificationand species detected andcharacterized include: E _; n ~.:~. '-~42 t. " ~ »Z »~.~».~ .. quanti cation of elements, elementalcompounds and '1.-art"§ =92_,' *,t*»92L'-za-¢¢:'.~; $ . ,.1_.; _._,;__H~_ _._;_;< ;.9 , <1." .a~~,__92 X,» M; molecular species. Alkali Earths,Alkali Metals .tii;;._.I:-__,-_t -'I~"-'-..V 8w s_-,. _...;._ ., si sg . :'-.~=- .92;., Elemental analysissolutions: Aluminium ' Arsenic Contact oremail for information. o Raw material testing Boron o Chemical specifications E? Preferto callus? I Bromine s Assay ln Europe call +44 1708580248 Cadmium in North America call713.844.3263 o Purityanalysis Carbon a Trace analysis Chloride e Global Laboratory Capabilities 0 QC screening Chromium Q Technology Centre Laboratorie: o Troubleshooting Copper, Gold o Trace Analysis Q identification or unknowns Halogens e Hydrocarbons Test Methods o Speciation See LaboratoryCapabilities! Hydrogen 0 Materials Analysis Iron Elemental analysislaboratory techniques: o Pharmaceutical Testing Iodine o Food & Agri Analysis Lead 0 ICP: inductively CoupledPlasma Spectrometry s Mineral Assay Analysis Lithium 0 ICPIOES: Optical EmissionSpectrometry, o Nanotechnology ResearchLab ICP-DES. ICPOES Mercury, MercurySpecies e Biotechnology Research Lab 0 lCPlMS: Mass Spectrometry, Metals .a Computational Chemistry ICPMS, lCP~MS Nitrogen, NitrogenSpecies 0 GC/ICP/MS: Gas ChromatographyInductively Nickel Coupled PlasmaMass Spectrometry,GC-lCP- MS, GCICPMS Nonmetals 0 XRF: X-Ray FluorescenceSpectrometry Oxygen 9 AAS: Atomic Absorption Spectrometry,AA Phosphorous, Potassium o Automated combustion techniques Precious Metals Q Pyrolysis Silicon 8 lnfra red detectors ' Silver o Thermal conductivity detectors Sulfur, SulfurSpecies o Fluorescence detectors Titanium, Vanadium 0 Chemiluminescence detectors Zinc and more Q Cold vapour atomicabsorbtion, AAS. 92 ig fl. PrintThis Page ...... _ I I 'l I lnterteltCalet; Brettilgisic hftp://wwwintertek-cb.com/neWsitetest/neWs/ elementa1ana1ysis.shtm1 5/6/2005 -,.~.s, .7 and ALL II*IFCl13!I-Li&TIElI=IC-IiI=Il'TAI1-.lED EIEFEIIJLHJELASSIFIEIII ' fags , 1 ¢f1; ,. BATE 1.2-111-zoosE11 =5rr:=2='1UE B.p;-'13..W ,. an,»~ t~ ~-~1:.'->1 .~1':-3::_¬~e;§;;:*;.-,,;~;.i:" who WeNE Location; 3,Services News g Career_ Centai_ _ _ Co n acI t Us Site Map i§_e_ar_c_hl]___ iw-:=s;ab,e Services Lab°"at°TY, andTesting_ , InspectionM,_ _ Services-.t_.- L0¢B 092 15 1 Locations lntertek operatesover 35Laboratories and 45 Officesthe in UnitedStates America,of sewingthe Petroleu Send Us A Request Chemical,Food, Agriculture, Consumer, Pharmaceutical,Polymer, PersonalCare, Energy, Engineering, Home: Locations& Services Electronics andManufacturing industries. mi E Prefer to call us? I, * » :-u*~ -'-' ' > t t Call 713.844.3263for all services. ~~»."-'ta. .2 Business enquiriesonly please @ jg 2,; »: _'.'..rc_;.Jt:,§ ,3.» v ; rt ~ =. I>~"w "@> § ?t-;~,, 7 ;.,. , USA FastLabLocal Sen/icesHotline: 3 :1 ,. xiii 'r'; if-/:5; @£%§%7"' - ? "»ta:. ,2 i. ~»i I 1-866-522-2424, option5* -,» wk,'.~. .».!-*.<,,.,-,, -. <:.<, :-,4W " $5 0 Contact or email for ~f-~,~:,zr a, " _11<-~.s- lb9,; » Q /AI ,1, ,7 , , ,<,,5_»>v-w_,,, , <4 2:; u=_ t~' '1' ' , _ 4, /, 4~ *92A » informaton J e w/ i § :1: 2" t o Laboratory Capabilities 3'' >>¢ 0 inspection Services , 2 - .. :;_>1:1r~ ~~'2'92~'- =" _ . o North America Services 9:, Gulf Coast.SE Atlantic.inland RiversRegions s Global Services andLocatio New OrleansChemical ProcessLab" West CoastRegion New OrleansPetroleum I Chemical Lab" Caribbean New OrleansFood Agri Lab Los AngelesPetroleum Lab Houma, LAE&P CalibrationServices San FranciscoPetroleum Lab Bahamas Houston Operations,Calibration Services California TechnicalCenter Laboratory Houston Petroleum/Chemical Laborarory Seattle, Washington Domican Republic Portland, Oregon San Juan, Ponce, PuertoRico Bayport, Channelviaw,Stolt Terminalb,Texas* Honolulu Hawaii Texas City, Freeport, Pi.Arthur, Texas" t St. Croix,Virgin islands Corpus Christi,Brownsville, Texas Kenai, Valdez,Alaska St. Eustatius,Trinidad, Curacao,Aruba Lake Charles,Gonzales, Gretna,Louisiana Mobile, Alabama ' USA Laboratoryand InspectionService Links Northeast, GreatLakes Regions Savannah, Georgia o Petroleum Testing Capabilities Tampa, Pt. Everglades,Jacksonville, Florida Peoria, lL Memphis, Tennessee Chicago PetroleumLab, lL 0 Chemical Testing Capabilities St. Louis, Missouri Toledo, OH, Pittsburgh, PA o Polymer Analysis Laboratories Cincinnati, Ohio Philadelphia PetroleumLab. PA* Q RoHS and WEEE Compliance Lousiville, Kentucky Baltimore, MD,Norfolk, VA New York Harbor PetroleumLab e Food and AgriculturalServices New Haven,CT. Boston, MA o Pharmaceutical Services Portland, ME e Exploration and Production Services 0 USA Terms andConditions I E1Print Ti1iSPil§_}E lntertek CalebBrett Disc , / . htlpl//WWW.i1'liZCI't6k-Cb.CO1 I1/I16WSi'E6'ECST/ services/usa/ 5/6/2005 Contact Usabout traceelement analysis y aterialtesting. NofthcmAnalytical L - ratories Page 1of 2 ll . "arr . <.~ *=~_ . "F I ~ ~ 1--~'=;§Q _ vat er I I iv!» I '. $3115.31;3< ,2: t _. -~ 1.. g tiairilz k - at " I fie A '§*. r .ew .2" g :.. a;ai§/gala~ ~~ A ,....i.ia' 92.~ .~* .7 5* ~ ..a¢;~a*>;*~ r I pg A ..; 5 515 .35wéf. ugégjiw-1_ 92'1"¢;¢~ 1* . 4~ M Q-.,. ._ e, ~ ¢ Telephone: 2 <.r'3 *§» . 03!429-9500 . . ,1! .. -,,/.; *¢, 1 .,..v 4 I ~ .¢ ' ,~ _. '92* 800! 625-9300 ...¢ y ~ lI~;/,,. _ .", .._ .-, I i5 Y. . ~./,5 .92_s 03. . 3? . . , M711> 3 V ii gr;-;1~.2,~ 35%* ' 3 §~;-..1;925» a,4-w,4 , t :-../--¢~.~~_:A,,Q~92~:,'1, /> - ..Y,_,$92 - R Fax: 5... »~7$14.-7 §1$P#.§'T3§i§i$5 03!429-9471 W1, "rmsézr i_1§'é,l¢i§=e=iz'-. *ii Q, E-mail: ;AIIE![1 l3 T '4 _<. Q». info@northernanalytica|.com 0 . 92 1.". .~.< Site Map- Available Techniques RFP- Form- FeaturedApplications - Accreditations Our- Histo[y_- Email List -Contact Us- Home- This sitelast updated on Friday,April 2, 2004. web~5ites .C0lT¥ sum: urnmini. http://WWW.northemanalytica1.com/contacthtm 5/6/2005 element analysls& material techniques Page 1 of2 Heme List l . <»eama¢r,.ue gigvailabie Techniques_t,,.,c._,.M.>!§~M »M M. Q - . QC} ALL :u~1Fn;:1u:r:rn1~ii::n~m;r1~rEn HERE In 1:5 mircmsszrzaa Click techniqueto see description! rum: 12-10-zone E11 amaze UC Brti-I,-'a5,.»';s=: Technique 1- InductivelyCoupled PlasmaMass Spectrometry ICPMS! Technique2 - Glow DischargeMass Spectrometry GDMS! Technique 3- SparkSource MassSpectrometry SSMS! m t~Technique 4 AtomicAbsorption Spectrophotometry AAS! Technique 5 - LECO ~Combustion Analysis- ~? Ah§[§5f» §' Y Site Map- Available Techniqgs RFP - Form- Featured Applications - y.I _> ~ . AccreditalionsOur - History- Email List - ContactUs - Home - This site last updatedon Friday,April 2,2004. {_ =; §§{>web-sites,com *sun thanu nst F htftp://wwwnorthernanalytical.com/techniqueshtm 5/6/2005 ALL Abstract Viewer i EEFLEIIJ I5 l,Ti-IIILASPIIFIED Page 1 92i 0 -it'I'E 13-15-2508 3'2 60324TJC ofl T BMil _."'F! SKi" -s.we ."-ée= A ._ . i=iiiii'*;&§é5.1., , ,_.,_;_;_,;33__=<_92se-.=.:___t§.._c~a.~z -::~..&=~ 92<2.*:*¢;2=~.:.5}t~ M~.~~i*_.2:::'t._~.* W " * ;,.,,,r ,_, ,,,ct T,,c.;__.____..._..._,,;.._.-J.c » ~ A "v< i ~92 __ -1 ,__ P 92 : <1 ta '~V~ : Wm-¢. .-; is ' *2 "' E 1'5. r¢_ Abstract Viewer ~ u-@--Q $3155 s----1 Wire Analysis Using Fast Fourier Transform Processing Techniques in Paper Identification Cases. Mr. Neil Holland ScientificDocument Services Pty. Ltd., Australia! . Email Address: §[email protected].*£4I_QIJ1_-ail. The methods for physical paper testing and the chemical analysis of paperare well documented throughout the literature when e 'xamining paper ' involved in forensic cases. Within this literature the use of X-rays, Beta Rays, Oblique and Transmitted light can provide the examiner valuable information about paper formation and in particular about surface and fiber characteristics of the paper A . studyof the wire marks wh 'ere visi ble can provide additional information but in those papers where they are difficult to examine, the use of a technique to capture and h process t e images . to reveal the wire . . marks can be extremely beneficial . . initially . . images of the paper formation are captured using oblique light or Beta Ray preferred!techniques and the resultant ima g esare scannecl and then processed using Fast Fourier Transform Fl-Ti!analysis. This technique allows for the pattern of the wire marks to b 'e captured and the resultant Power Spectrums frequencydomain! can be compared with control samples from known sources mills!or compared to other paper exhibits The . q Power Spectrum fre uenc y domain! and the inverse retransformation!patterns can be compared to distinguish papers produced on different wires thus differentiatin gth . e papers Conversely ' the results may provide additional ' 'information ' ' that may establish 'that two or more papers are indistinguishable. ' ' t htip ://www. anzfss2004.org.nz/cgi-bin/ViewAbstrziots.cgi?p ap erid=49 5/6/2005 J _' G Page 1 of29 I:IIed. IUIY1O= I997 * LITIIIELASSTFIEIJ. Imrmmrt-_. .IIlI-I'I"_II~1ElIIt DATE 12-llil-2005 at-' 50224LTII Emil;- Ra.-'L;=;|: UNITED STATES COURT CI: APPEALS I FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT N0. 96-5286 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Iv. ALTIGRACI ROSARIO Aggellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY D.C. CriminalN0. 95-or-00277! ARGUED JANUARY 23, 1997 BEFORE:NYGAARD and LEWIS, CircuitJudgeé and COHILL,*District Judge. Filed July 10, 1997! Michael V. Gilberti, Jr. ARGUED! Bennett& Leahey 321 Broad Street Red Bank, NJ 07701 Attorney forAggeliant http://vls.Iaw.vi|I.edu/Iocator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 I E Page 2 of 29 » onorable Maurice B. Cohill, United States District Judge for the estern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. evin McNulty ' rltticethe of UnitedStates Attorney 70 Broad Street, Room 502 Jewark, NJ 07102 Andrew O. Schiff ARGUED! Office of the United States Attorney 402 East State Street, Room 502 Trenton, NJ 08608 Attorneys for Appellee OPINION OF THE COURT LEWIS, Circuit Judge. Altigraci Rosario challenges her conviction on two counts of passing United States Treasury checks in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 510 a!. Of primary importance on appeal is Rosarids challenge to the sut ciency of the evidence with regard to Count 1 of the indictment. We must decide whether a conviction for passing a treasury check can be http://vls.law.vil|.eclu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 i 7 I 4 Page 3 of 29 sustained basedsolely onevidence establishingthat the defendant possessedthe check and that it was "probable" that the defendant hadsigned the check. We conclude that it can and will affirm. Altigraci Rosariooperated a tax preparation servicein Hightstown, NewJersey. JoseRios, Rosario'snephew by marriage, wasemployed byRosario andassisted withher tax preparationservice. In February 1993,the U.S. Treasury Departmentmailed aTreasury checkto Angel and Ana Andradein the amount of$2,996.00. Soonthereafter, the Andradesfiled a complaint withthe Treasury Department allegingthat they had not received thecheck. On January 11, 1994,the New Jersey National/ Corestates Bank notified the U.S. Secret Sen/ice that Jose Rios had deposited theAndrade checkinto his account at the bank. That same day, the Secret Serviceinterviewed 2 . Rios. Duringthe interview, Rios statedthat Rosariohad given him the signed check andasked himto cash it. Rios apparently receiveda $20 fee for executing thetransaction. ln September1993, theU.S. TreasuryDepartment mailed http://vls.law.vi|l.edu/looator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 0 Q Page 4 29of M ax refund check to lvan Vitiello in the amount of ,943.03. Subsequently,Vitiello led a complaint with the easury Departmentalleging thathe hadnot receivedthe neck. lnhis complaint, Vitiello identified Altigraci Rosario B histax preparer. Vitiello stated that he had authorized ~ .osario to have the check delivered to her post office box, rut he had not authorized her to cash the check. Dn May 4, 1994, a U.S. Postal inspector confirmed that i/itiello s check had been delivered to a post office box lregistered to Altigraci Rosario and Jose Rios. That same day, theVitiello checkwas cashedat Reed'sGarage in ' Cranbury, New Jersey. Employees of Reed'sGarage informed thegovernment thatRosario andRios hadcashed the Vitiello check. Sometime later, the government identified Rosario s fingerprint on the check. On November 18, 1994, the government led a tvvo-count misdemeanor complaint against Rosario, charging her with negotiating two checks bearing forged endorsements in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 51O a!and § 510 !. Count 1 of the indictment related to the Andrade check and Count 2 related to the Vitiello check. After a one-dayjury trial, Rosario was convicted on both counts.1 ://vls.law_92/ill.edu/locator/3dlJuly1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 _l_ _ _ At trial,and AngelAndrade Ana that testinghad they Page 5 of 29 never met Rosario, used her service or authorized her or anyone elseto endorsetheir check. Rios, theprosecution's chief witness, testified that Rosario had given him the Andrade check, which had been endorsed, along with a form of identification of the payee. Rosario asked Rios to cash the check, informinghim thatthe payee did not have a bank account and therefore could not cash the check. Apparently, Rios had a substantial amount of cash in a safe in the office due to a $20,000personal injury settlement.! 1. BecauseRosario doesnot challengethe sufficiencyof the evidence with regardto Count 2, relatingto the Vitiello check,we will not discuss the proof offered at trial with regard tothat count. 3 Rios furthertestified that he had not metthe persons whom Rosariotold him had givenher the check. Indeed, Rios statedthat he "didn'tsee even the people." App.at 47A. Accordingto Rios,he tookthe Andradecheck from Rosario, photocopiedthe identificationand gave Rosario the cash, lessa $20 fee. Rios stated thathe did not actuallysee http://vls.law.vilLedu/locator/3d/July'l997/97a1636p.htmh 5/10/2005 - _ - Page 6 of 29 Rbsario handthe cashover toany personwho mightbe associated withthe check,but thathe didsee her"talking to someone." App. at 49A. Finally, Rios testified that after the bank informed him that the Andrade checkhad been reported stolen,he looked for the photocopy thathe had made of the identi cation but could not find it. When he informed Rosario about the check, Riosacknowledged thatshe seemed"genuinely surprised" thatthe checkhad beenreported stolen.App. at 54A. The governmentsupplemented thetestimony ofRios with the testimonyof a handwriting expert,Secret Sen/ice document examinerJeffrey Taylor.After comparingthe signature forAna Andradethat appearedon thecheck with a known sample ofRosario's handwriting,Taylor testi ed that Rosario"probably" hadforged thecheck herself-- that is, it was "more likely than not" that she had done so. Essentially, thetestimony ofRios, Taylorand theAndrades constituted theentirety of the government'scase on Count 1 of the indictment. After thejury rendered its verdict, Rosario fileda Rule 29 motion forjudgment of acquittalon Count 1 with the http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 9 _ __l. | - n Page 7 of 29 m agistrate judge,arguing, interalia, that the evidencewas insufficient tosustain a conviction.2 Themagistrate judge denied Rosario'spost-trial motions. See United States v. Rosario, Crim.No. 94-5050K-O1 D.N.J. May9, 1995!.3 On June 2, 1995, the maglstratejudge sentenced Rosario to eight months in prison on both counts to be sen/ed 2. Rosarioalso movedfor a new trial on both counts basedupon the magistrate judge'sallegedly erroneousruling on her motionin limine. 3. The magistrate judgehad jurisdictionto sen/e as trial judge over Rosario'spursuant trial to18 U.S.C.§ 3401,~ whichallows a magistrate judge to try and sentence personsaccused andconvicted of misdemeanor offenses. 4 concurre'ntly.4the time Atof sentencing,Rosario was already servinga one-yearsentence foran unrelated bribery conviction. Rosario thenappealed themagistratejudge's decisionto the districtcourt pursuantto 18l_.J.S.C. 3402.5 § The ' district court affirmed Rosario'sconviction and sentence in all respects.See UnitedStates v.Rosarig, Crim.No. 96-277 D.N.J. April3, 1996!. On this appeal, Rosario'sprimary http://vls.law,vill_edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 1e~ 4r ' 92 . u Page 8 of 29 challenge to her conviction is that the evidence offered at trial was insufficient tosupport thejury's convictionon Count 1.6 The district court hadjurisdiction overthe criminal proceedings pursuantto 18 U.S.C. §3231. We have jurisdiction overthe appealpursuant to28 U.S.C.§ 1291. Our reviewof a sufficiency ofthe evidencechallenge is guided bystrict principlesof deferenceto ajury's verdict. United Statesv. Anderskow,88 F.3d245, 251 d Cir.!, cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 613 996!. We must viewthe evidence inthe lightmost favorableto thegovernment and 92 must sustaina jury sverdict if"a reasonablejury believing 4. Rosario was also ordered topay restitutionin the amounts of $2,996.00 and$1,934.00 the to victimsand topay aggregatedspecial assessments of $50.00. 5. That statute provides: in allcases ofconviction bya UnitedStates magistratean appealof right shalllie fromthe judgmentof themagistrate a tojudge of the district courtof the district inwhich the offense wascommitted. 18 u.s.c. § 3402. _ , http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm . 5/10/2005 l Page 9 of 29 ~ . 9 I 9 92J 6. Rosarioalso raisesagain theargument thatthe magistratejudge erred by denyingher motionin limineto excludethe admissionof her prior bribery conviction.We declineto addressthe merits of the magistrate's in limine ruling because,by not testifying attrial, Rosariohas failedto preserve this issue for appeal. See Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38 984! holdin g thatin ' ord er t o raise ' an dpreserve for review ' the claim' of improper impeachment with a prior conviction, a defendant must testify! United States v Moskovits, 86F 3d 1303 1305-06 d Cir 1996! same! cert denied 117 S Ct 968 997! 5 the governments evidence couldfind beyond a reasonable doubt thatthe governmentproved allthe elementsof the offenses UnitedStates vSalmon, 944F 2d1106 1113 d Cir 199 i! Accordingly [a] claimof insufficiencY of the evidence placesa very heavy burdenon the appellant United . Statesv Coyle , 63 F. 3d 1239, 1243 d Cir' . 1995! . Rosario wasconvicted ofcheck forgeryunder 18 U.S.C. § 510 a! !, which provides: a! Whoever,with intentto defraud-- ! passes, utters, or publishes,or attemptsto pass, http://vls.Iaw.vill.edu/locator/3dlJuly1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 - v Page 10 of 29 7 . ;er, or publish, any Treasury check or bond or icurity of the United States bearing a falsely made or rged endorsement or signature; tall be ned under this title or imprisoned not more tan ten years, or both. 8 U.S.C. § 510 a! !. 92t trial,the magistrate instructed the jury that, under Lhe statute,the government was required to prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: ! that the defendant passed or attempted to pass a U.S. Treasury check, ! that the check bore a forged or falsely made endorsement, ! that the defendant passed the check with inten t to defraud, and ! that the defendant acted knowingly and willfully. Rosario, Crim. No. 94-5050K-01, slip op. at 7. Rosario contends that the government failed to meet its burden on elements !, ! & !. Specifically, she argues that Rios'stestimony establishing that she possessed the check was insufficient to corroborate the testimony of the http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July199?/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 J7 Page 11 of 29 handwriting expertthat she probably forgedthe check. As noted earlier, Taylortestified that it was "probable" that Rosario had forged the check. "Probable" is a term of 6 art used by Secret Service document examiners. The "probable" category falls exactly in the middle of the six- point spectrum between "positive identification" and "positive elimination."Thus, handwritingexperts will use the term "probable" todescribe times whenthe evidencefalls considerablyshort of the "virtually certain"category andyet still points rather strongly towardthe suspect,i.e., there are several significant similaritlespresentbetween thequestioned and knownwritings, therebut arealso numbera of irreconcilable differencesand theexaminer suspects that theyare dueto somefactor butcannotsafely attribute thelack of agreement tothe effect ofthat 92 factor. Thomas V.Alexander, Definitionof Handwriting Opinions, App. at37A. The governmentconcedes thatTaylor's testimonyalone would beinsufficient tosustain a conviction under §51O a!. http://vgls.law.vill.edu[locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm . 5/10/2005 . .; é Page 12 of 29 Th'e governmentargues, however,that Taylor'stestimony that Rosarioprobably forgedthe check, coupled withRios's testimony that Rosario had given him the check, would allow the jury to make the inference that Rosario had forged the check. Moreover, according to the government, once the jury concluded that Rosario had forged the check, it couldlogically concludethat she had doneso knowingly and willfully and with intentto defraud. We agree. By establishing thatRosario possessed thecheck, andthus had theopportunity forge to theit, governmentprovided validation forTaylor's testimonythat Rosario had probably forged thecheck.7 . 7. Once the jury was providedwith enoughinformation toconclude that Rosario hadforged the check, it certainly couldhave inferredthat she acted knowingly and willfullyand withthe intentto defraud.Of course, the requisitestate of mind elementsonly followif the jury believedthat Rosario did,in fact, forge the check. See,e.g., UnitedStates v.~Hall,_ 632 F.2d 500, 503 th Cir. 1980! holding thatonce forgery wasestablished, inferences ofknowledge and unlawfulintention followed!.Given the Andrades testimonythat they did not know Rosarionor authorizeher to endorse thecheck, thejury could have assumedthat Rosarioforged the http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 92 r v Page 13 of 29 endorsement of the check with the requisite intent to defraud. 7 . In reaching this conclusion, we are persuaded by the reasoning put forth in United States v. Richardson, 755 " F.2d 685 8th Cir. 1985! per curiam! and United States v. Rivamonte, 666 F.2d 515 1th Cir. 1982! per curiam!. In both Richardson and Rivamonte, as here, the handwriting expert's testimonyestablished onlythat it was "probable" that the defendant had forged the check. ln Richardson,the court upheld a check forgery conviction challenged on insufficiency grounds. The handwriting experttestified that Richardson had"probably" signed the check. Thistestimony wassupplemented by evidence thatRichardson hadaccess toa key to the victim's home,that she had madea deposit inthe exact same amount as the stolen check, and that her fingerprints were on the stolen check. In upholdingthe conviction,the court concludedthat this was "ample evidenceto support the verdict." Richardson, 755 F.2d at 686. Similarly, inRivamonte, the court upheld a check forgery conviction basedon the following evidence:a handwriting expert's testimonythat the defendant had"probably" signed http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm g 5/10/2005 l the check;the defendant'sfingerprints'92rvere the check; Page on 14 of 29 the defendant'saccount numberwas written on the back of the check; and the payees names were written on the defendant's pre-encodeddeposit slip. Rivamonte, 666F.2d at 516-17.The court held that"a jury reasonably could conclude thatthis evidenceis inconsistentwith every reasonable hypothesisof appellant'sinnocence." Q at 517. Although in Richardson andRivamonte thegovernment offered slightly more circumstantial evidence than was offered at Rosario's wetrial, are nevertheless convinced that the evidenceestablishing thatthe respectivedefendants had possessedthe check was of primaiy significancein those cases.Our conclusionis bolsteredby the Eleventh Circuit's post-Rivamontedecision in United States v. Henderson, 693F.2d 1028 1th Cir. 1982!. ln Henderson, the courtreversed acheck forgeryconviction basedsolely on ambiguoushandwriting testimonyand evidenceshowing that the defendant's hadwife cashed the stolen check. The government offered no evidence that Henderson had ever possessed check.the DistinguishingRivamonte, courtthe noted: 8 http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 _-H- AlthoughI 1 Rivamonte boththe pre:s.entappeal and had Page 15 of 29 handwriting expertstestify thatthe respective defendants "probably"endorsed thechecks, the additional evidence in Rivamonte constituted sufficient evidence tosustain a conviction. Thefingerprints and the defendant'saccount numbersupport the conclusion drawnby the handwriting expertin Rivamonte. ' Henderson, 693 F.2d at 1032. Here, althoughRosario s fingerprintswere not found on the check,Rios's testimonyestablished thatRosario wasin possession ofthe check.Thus, Rios'stestimony that Rosario possessedthe check provided thesame corroboration forthe handwritingexpert's testimonythat the fingerprint evidence in Rivamonte and Richardson did. See alsoUnited Statesv. Chatman,557 F.2d147, 148 8th Cir. 1977! per curiam! upholding checkforgery conviction because accessibilityof payee smailbox todefendant provided corroborationfor less than conclusiveexpert handwriting testimony!. ln our view, because the evidence established that Rosario did,in fact, possess thecheck, thejury could have http://vls.law.vill.edu/Iocator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 92 . 92-- - Q . Page 1629 of edthat factto corroboratethe handwritingexpert's s stimony that she had probably forged the signature on check. While neither of these factors independently ould be sufficient to support a conviction, taken together iey are sufficient to support the jury'sguilty verdict.8 l. We are not persuaded by Rosario's attemptto characterize Rios s estimony as "exculpatory" for her. Using Rios stestimony, Rosario mplies that she merely unknowingly passed the forged check to Rios and then passed along the cash to the person or persons who brought in the check. Rosario finds further support for her theory from Rios s testimony that she was "genuinely surprised" when he reported that the check was stolen. As the district court pointed out, however, the jury was not required to believe that Rosario made any of the arguably exculpatoryout-of-court statementsRios. to R_os,_a_ig,Crim. No.96-277, op.slip at6. And,in any event, the statements she relies on are not inconsistent with guilt. Simply stated, the jury had no reason to believe that Rosario was being truthful with Rios. indeed, the jury could have just as well believed that 9 Finally, we acknowledge that this is a close case. indeed, were we sitting as triers of fact, we very well may have come http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 Page 17 of 29 t_o.~aU. conclusion differentthe jury i thanhere. Nevertheless, wecannot saythat therewas insufficient evidence tosupport thejury's verdict.Accordingly, we affirm Rosario s conviction. Rosario s statementsto Rios served to deceive him into believingthat she had unwittinglypassed theforged check.After all,it certainlysen/ed Rosario s interests for Rios to believe the check transaction was legitimate becauseRios mayhave beenless willingto cashthe check had he known it was stolen. 10 NYGAARD, CircuitJudge, dissenting. The governmentargues thatthe combinationof wholly ambiguous testimonyfrom a handwriting expertand equivocal testimonyfrom a witness receivingfavorable treatment fromthe governmentis sufficientto supportthe conviction ofAltigraci Rosariofor passinga UnitedStates Treasury check.The majorityaccepts thisargument. dol not; hence, l dissent. To convictRosario of check forgeryunder 18 U.S.C. § 51O a! !, the government wasrequired toprove four elements beyonda reasonabledoubt: ! that the check httpt//vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1_636p.htm 5/10/2005 l was. >'a U.S. Treasury ! that kcheckcheck; a boreforged E, IQ: Page 18 of 29 or falsely made endorsement; ! that Rosario passedthe check with intent to defraud; and ! that Rosario acted knowingly and willfully. There was no direct evidence adduced at trial to satisfy the government's burdenon elements !, ! and !. Recognizing this, the government nonetheless asks us to cobble together a series of inferences tosupport thejury's verdict.lt argues that, taken collectively, the testimonyof Taylor,the handwriting expert, and Rios, theman who negotiated thestolen check, are sufficientto permit the jury to infer that Rosarioforged the check. Building on this inference, it then claims that the jury could draw the further inferences thatRosario possessed therequisite knowledge,willfulness andintent to defraud necessaryto satisfy the remainingelements ofthe charged offense.In my view, these"inferences" dono more than permitthe jury to speculatethat Rosariois guilty, especially in light of the weak testimony fromwhich these inferences are drawn. Jeffrey Taylor,the government'shandwriting "expert," could onlytestify that Rosario "probably"signed the name "Ana Andrade" to the back of the Andrades check. The trial http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 - Page 19 of 29 record' » however, shows,Taylor'sQstimony that even was more ambiguous.Indeed, undercross-examination Taylor concededthere that werea number of "irreconcilable differences" betweenthe Ana Andrade signatureon the check and Rosario's samplesignature. App.at 35A. Moreover, Taylorcandidly admittedthat there was "some doubt" in his mind as to whether Rosariosigned Ana Andrade's onname the check. App.at 35A-36A. '11 Significantly, Tayloralso acknowledgedon direct examination thathe "foundno evidencethat [Rosario]wrote the remainingsignature [AngelAndrade's] that oncheck." App. at32A. Taylor'sconcessions makehis already equivocal conclusionthat Rosario"probably" forgedAna Andrade's nameon the check even less reliable. l would conclude thatinferences drawnfrom suchclearly ambiguous testimonycannot possiblysatisfy the government's burdenof establishing beyond areasonable doubt thatRosario forgedAna Andrade'ssignature onthe check. Recognizing theinherent weaknessof Taylor'svague opinion, thegovernment wouldhave usrely onthe http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Julyi997/97a1636p.htm 5/1 O/2005 1 1 Page 20 of 29 testimony. > Riossupport forof Rcgrio thatthe forged check. Rios's testimony,it argues, establishes thatRosario both possessed andhad the opportunity toforge the check, thereby allowingthejury to infer that Rosario did,in fact, forge AnaAndrade s signatureon thecheck. Bypresenting evidence thatRosario possessedthe check and hadthe opportunity tosign it, the governmentcontends thatit provided validationforTaylor's equivocalopinion that Rosario probablyforged the check. ln support of its argument, thegovernment relies primarily on two cases where courtsaffirmed forgeryconvictions basedin parton testimony froma handwritingexpert indicatingthat the defendant had"probably" forgedthe stolencheck. g United Statesv. Richardson, 755 F.2d685 8thCir. 1985! per curiam!; United Statesv. Rivamonte,666 F.2d 515 1th Cir. 1982! per curiam!. ln my view, however, reliance on Richardson and Rivamonteis imprudent for a number ofreasons. First, notwithstanding theassertion thatthe governmentoffered only "slightly" more circumstantial evidence in Richardson and Rivamontethan thatadduced here, Maj. Opinion at8, the records in those cases demonstrate that there was http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 1 Page 21 of 29 ample v tendingevidenceto establishgelements of those check forgery convictions. For example,in Richardson,the court affirmed a check forgery convictionwhere thehandwriting expert'stestimony was complementedby evidenceshowing thatRichardson had a key to the home wherethe check was stolen, 12 Richardson's fingerprintswere found on thestolen check,a stolen depositslip was usedto cash the check, and Richardson hadmade a deposit inthe exact same amount as thestolen checkduring thetime periodin whichthe stolen check was cashed. 755 F.2d at 686. Similarly, in Rivamonte, the court affirmed a check forgery convictionwhere theexpert's opinionwas complemented byevidence showingthat Rivamonte's fingerprints andpalmprints werefound onthe check,the defendant's accountnumber waswritten on the back of the check, thepayee's were names written on Rivamonte'spre- encoded depositslip, and a depositwas made in the defendant's accounton thesame daythat thestolen check was negotiated.666 F.2d at 516-1'7. ¢ In eachcase, thegovernment profferedstrong http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1 997/97a1636p.htm 5/ lO/2005 l circumstantial- - specifically evidenceto respectivethe reqated Page 22 of 29 defendants possessionof the stolen checks,their intentto defraud and their states of mind. Such was not the case here; wherethe government,lacking sufficientevidence to establish any of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt was forcedto ask the jury to speculatethat Rosarioforged the check, passed the check with intent to defraud, and acted with requisite knowledgeand willfulness. l do not believe we can contort Richardson and Rivamonte to supportthe propositionthat testimonyfrom a i handwriting expertindicating thata defendant"probably" forged astolen check in conjunction withevidence showing possession ofthe stolencheck by the defendantconstitutes sufficient evidence to affirm a conviction under l8 U.S.C. § 51O a! !. Simply stated,there is no such baseline position establishedin the case law. instead, Richardson and Rivamontesuggest thatan "expert"opinion thatthe defendant probablyforged thecheck, coupledwith sufficient additionalcircumstantial evidencedemonstrating possession, willfulness,knowledge andintent to defraud, is necessary beforea convictionwill be affirmed. United Statesv. Hall,632 F.2d500 th Cir. 1980!,is not http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a'l6Z36p.htm 5/1, O/200,5 Page 23 of 29 to~the~ u ln contrary. @,the courthelgat forgery once is conclusively proven,inferences offact regarding possession, intent and knowledge canbe permissiblydrawn by the 13 government. ld_.at 502. The handwritingexpert in @, however, providedan uneguivocalopinion thatthe defendant had forged the payee's nameon the stolen check, thereby providingthe governmentwith conclusivefactual proof of the forgery element of the offense from which inferences tending to establish the other elements of the . offense couldbe drawn.ld_; Here,in contrast,the government has offered only ambiguous, inconclusive testimony regardingthe forgeryelement ofthe offense.As such, thereis noconclusively fact proven forgeryof from which the government coulddraw inferencestending to s establish theother elementsof the offense of conviction. My interpretationof the case law is supportedby the post-Rivamonte decisionin UnitedStates v. Henderson, 693 F.2d 1028 1th Cir. 1982!, which,in my view, does not bolster thegovernment's argument.ln Henderson, the court reversed acheck forgeryconviction basedon ambiguous handwriting testimonyand circumstantialevidence tending I ghttp://vls villlaw edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/2005 Page 24 of 29 torshow- 92- the that defendant'swife ha ashedthe stolen check. ln reaching its decision, the court reasoned as follows: Although it is apparent that someone endorsed Mr. l92/loore's signatureon the back of the treasury check, the evidence was not sufficient for a fair jury to conclude beyonda reasonable doubt thatMr. Henderson was the endorser. The evidence, because it was circumstantialrequired thatthe jurydraw an inference that because Ms. Henderson used the defendant'sto car cash the check, and because Ms. Henderson did cash the check, the defendant must have signedthe check. This simplydoes follow.not it is unreasonableto infer Mr. Henderson'sguilt based upon the actions of his wife. Yet, it is apparent from the evidencethat there was little elseupon whichto base a conviction. . . . Although circumstantialevidence is testimonyto the surroundingfacts and circumstancesof the point at issue, theymust at some point connect, to allow the trier of fact to draw the inference that the fact asserted is true. ld_. at1031 internalcitation omitted!.The courtthen http;//92/ls,|aw,vi||_edu/locator/3d/Jul_y1997/97a1636p.htm 5/1 O/2005 Page 25 of 29 proceeded~ v distinguish to Rivamonte thebasisthe of 14 strength of the additional evidence offered by the government in that case. As the Henderson court concluded: "ln the present case, the additional evidence, together withthe handwritingexpert's probable testimony, is not sufficient." 693F.2d at 1032. Significantly,there is nothing inthe Hendersondecision tosuggest thatthe court viewed thefailure of thegovernment to produce evidence showing thatMr. Hendersonpossessed thestolen checkas determinative ofthe sufficiencyof the evidence. Rather,the Henderson courtreviewed theproffered evidencein its entirety and determined that there was insufficient evidence supplementing theambiguous handwritingtestimony to permita reasonable jury toconclude beyonda reasonable doubt that lvlr. Hendersonwas guilty of the offense of conviction.1 ' Notwithstanding theabsence ofany legal precedent for its conclusionthat ambiguoushandwriting evidence coupled withevidence ofpossession constitutessufficient evidence toaffirm a conviction under§ 51O a!,the government speciously reasons that Rosarids conviction http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/1 O/2005 Page 26 of 29 ~ u 92 . | . . wasv proper because Rios s testimon at Rosario possessed the check provided the same corroboration for the handwritingexperts testimonythat the fingerprint evidence in Rivamonte and Richardson did Wh a tthis bt I of forensic gymnasticsneglects toexplain, however,is that the government's fingerprintexpert was unable to identify any finger or palm prints belonging toRosario onthe Andrade check. App.at 42A-43A.Thus, the government wasforced to relyon Rios'stestimony theas "equivalent"of fingerprint evidence preciselybecause therewas nofingerprint evidence availableto supportthe conclusionthat Rosario forged Ana Andrades name on the back of the stolen check Rather thanlend credibilityto theambiguous handwriting testimony offeredin this case the governments relianceon Rios stestimony highlightsthe dearthof evidenceoffered by the governmentto meetits burdenof proof Simply stated l The majority correctlystates that in Hendersonthe governmentoffered no evidencethat Mr Henderson hadever possessedthe stolen check. Mai Opinionat 8 l note however, thatthe governmentsimilarly failed to offer any evidencespecifically relatingto Mr Hendersons intent to CIGTFGLIO Knowledgeor state or mind I http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997//97a l636p.htm5/10/2005 15 . Page 27 of 29 aside from Rios s testimonythe governmentfailed to adduce y additional evidenceto validateTaylor's equivocal conclusionthat Rosariosigned thestolen check. Lacking further additional evidence like that offered in the Rivamonte andRichardson cases e_.g_., fingerprints, palmprints, pre-codeddeposit slips!,l fail to understand how Rios'stestimony couldpossibly transformTaylor's ambiguous conclusioninto factualproof sufficientto establish Rosario'sguilt beyond a reasonabledoubt. Finally, lam concernedbecause partsof Rios's testimony directly contradictinferences thatthe jurywas supposedto have drawnfrom Rioslstestimony. instance, For cross- on examination Rios testified that Rosario did not know that the checkwas stolen.App. at52A. Suchtestimony clearly undercutsidea the thatthe jurycould inferthat Rosario had the requisite knowledgeand intentto defraud necessary tosupport a conviction under§ 51O a! !. . Moreover,also it putsthe majorityin theawkward position of relying on Rios'stestimony inorder to bolster the inferences thatRosario possessedand forgedthe stolen check, butignoring Rios'stestimony inorder todraw the http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636vp.htm 5/10/2005 ' 92 Page 28 of 29 eréncesll Rosario thatthe hadrequisite nwledge and . ate ofmind necessary to support her conviction. Such sonsistencies further reinforce my conclusion that the /idence proffered in this case permitted the jury to do little ore than speculate asto Rosaridsguilt. 1 summary,l believe that the evidence adduced by the overnment at trial falls far below the horizon of certainty ,1/e requirein criminalprosecutions andis notsufficient to zonvict Rosario beyond a reasonable doubt. Handwriting analysis is at best an inexact science, and at worst mere speculation itself. %, §;g;, D. Michael Risinger _<-lat, Exorcism of ignorance as a Proxy for Rational Knowledge: The Lessons of Handwriting identification "Expertise", 137 U. Pa. L. Rev. 731, 739 989! reporting that "[t]rom the perspective of published empirical verification, handwriting identification expertiseis almostnonexistent"!. Assuch, l do not believe that wholly ambiguous testimony from a handwriting "expert" and selected testimony from a witness receiving favorable treatment from the government can 16 satisfy the government's burdenof proof. Accordingly, l would reverse Rosarids conviction. http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Julyi 997/97a1636p.htm_ g VA - 5/10/2005 I . . Page 29 29of ;°~.Tru"e éopy: Teste: Clerkthe of UnitedStates Couitof Agpeals for the Third Circuit 17 / http://vis.Iaw.viIl.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1636p.htm 5/10/20105 ALL P11-LQTIDDI C ElIi|'I AII1'EI l9292 HERE II-II : T q LA" JIFIED 92 o{92g3 ,IA Elf. 1 l.{J .> I3iitTE lZZ llIl iI.lIllIl3 B! E'l'BA1.'lr]"F'.-Il.:-I E<,192?§ i 92.£.:>S Brady and Other Ethical issues Facing Keynote Address on DNA and Forensic Scientists Genetics: A Challenge for Lawyers and Judges in the l92/luch evidenceacquired by prosecutors New Millennium may be material to the defense.The 1963 Brady v. Maryland decision requires them In science, there is a distinction between to turn over potentially exculpatory infor- "error" and "mistake"; in the law, there mation to the defense. Brady is some- is no such distinction. When_a mistake times seen as asking the prosecutor to occurs in a scientific experiment, the aid the accused. lt has produced more experiment can be conducted again. Freedom of information Act discoveries by Errors in experiments needonly bedocu- defense and more attempts to find out mented. in the law, an error is the same as about misleading evidence. One presenter a mistake because it may overturn a deci- noted that defense counsel needs ade- sion. Exoneration via DNA has become fair- quate breadth of discovery to obtain scien- ly frequent, but DNA databases remain tific evidence. On theother hand,Brady controversial. As genetics research contin- has in some cases led to large additional ues to shed light on these issues, it is like- areas of discovery for information that is ly to have more influence on the law. The only circumstantial. discovery of genetically caused diseases may raise issues of privacy and classifica- Can DNA Be the Magic Bullet? What tion of people by their DNA. Medical infor- DNA Can and Cannot! Do mation is already being used to make some hiring, firing, and promotion decisions. issues in the use of DNA evidence contin- ue to emerge. Among them are whether there is a right to postconviction relief Reports on Science and the Law based on DNA, the scientific limitations Daubert is not the only evidentiary stan- of DNA testing, and the inability of many dard, and the sky may not be falling as a crime laboratories to work every case that result of it. Peer review is a standard, involves DNAevidence. Analyticalprob- although one on which not too much lems persist even though information emphasis should be placed in the legal expands. Computer-assisteddata interpre- context. Changes in technical fields affect tation can help reduce laboratory backlogs. testimony, including police officers testi- One presenter noted that the common mony and clinical medical testimony. The assumption that DNA evidence wins the Kumho Tire decision illuminated the issue case could be dangerous. Defense attor- of rigor in a variety of technical fields, neys sometimes do not ask for indepen- causing, for example, handwriting evi- dent DNA testing because problems like dence and fingerprints to be increasingly contamination can arise. Although the challenged.Typica|ly, policeare not asked Daubert decisionrequired assessingevi- to explain the basis of their experience dence for its admissibility, courts still when they testify, but scientific experts have not decided how to treat mixed-DNA are asked to do so. Certain issues have evidence. created essentially a scientific revolution in the courts. The current confusion over litigation-sponsored science is likely to promote more research that will resolve issues now in conflict. U3/'l92lews.com:CSI effect:The On TV, it'sslam-dunk all evidenceand quickconvictions. Nowjur... Page 1 of 3 ,./If . V J V W v s Jas ~v advertiseineitt We M T" -~=~@-~1: v»=1~i'~=e%1aa>s*as@Y :1:T;»'"2&" .¢~.» - ~<~~ l. ... W .. , ' - j=; x =~7¬'g§ %*. ;'>.5~?'~:x."'*'¬/.%vf4.:-'..,-,,.v,,_§__v-.!, 92;___,.__ CURRENT RmitiilesISSUEIa GUlD£S l BUSlNESS l HEALTH I TECH l lwisumstou wmsttns COLUi'ili~lS | I | CAREER EDUCATIDN92 ALL Iurinm-mttdm Gui-TFAZIGED - Home> Culture HEIR.EIlE-ITEIIILLSSIFIED Is _ ~' ¥1 4/ 2 s / 0 s ff" ~=~3.. st ;- .w- . J; The CS1 Effect Page 6 of 6! _ 3.1»:;*»:»'r =">-s:!E>~. 4%:=,*-.-~r*¢*.=i¢§,".*,»si§si~_-.'?i' ;-'<-"-'-$"~»=*-':'_ ~v§*l~= Microscopic hair analysis was a staple of prosecutions until just a few years ago and was accorded an unhealthy degree of certitude. "Hair comparisons have been discredited almost uniformly in court," says Petersonof the University of Illinois-Chicago. "Thereare many instances where sciencehas not come up to the legal needs,"adds James Starrs, professor of forensic sciences andlaw at George WashingtonUniversity. Everyone,including the jury, wants certainty. But itseldom exists inforensics. Sothe expert,says Starrs,"always needsto leave the possibility of error." ' MORE_ONLINE http://www.usnews.com/usnews/c're/articles/050425/25csi_6.htmQ 5/:16/2005 News com:The CS1effect: OnTV, it'sall slam-dunk evidence andquick convictions Now iur Page 2 of 3 7"" _ l Details on forensics, the law, and how they intersect are available in a free database at the National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology, and the Law, a program of the National Institute of Justice, at ncstl.org/ Previous Page 1|2|3|4|5|6 93¢;-1-'»~.2'~.*.4 §>F.~.~.*s'»V 11 wér>':_'»'»T§ , .-i"1»-Q ';.;:¢:;=arise; .-13>-If -:==j.§ -G"LiT7§"'L" £'*'-§"l P~ er-",3"-;; ~"?T".1 1-": .-2 4 =¢-I-1;- 1 "it,-.2; .~=~, 1 yr --=2:~;x--'::»-2233*-L-;~ z:=-.i»= '-.i:1t"";5? "3337!"::'¢§i§1?!*. Y§- A-~-<-1?? ~*~ '~-»;'*;~=;,-'=»: ~ »" *3F 92 if Q? %.1 liiltk mail article Go totop Respond to ; Fr£9 Email4 Get the magazine toa friend; ofthe page 5 this EFHCIEi n l l fi i dfreetnai issues Get 4 Free issues of U.5. Newsi -»,4 iS*N&Ws'Enter yourtrial subscriptionto U.$.News andreceive 4 risk-free issues. . regtr; §*'1j_;7,~'s :ls , 1 '~~ 1 1,59. Q!W": i.» LL!. .».1. s-* ~''.~r3@~;r §925ru 3?e§92¥;'~4§~L~;'35?,>i§ First Name "rm;-3;:.-4»; , a3~,_, I." ~%92'»*'*»; " "4 :34, Last iiame " ~;-,»;,w92. _.. ;,~ 'I 't~'1!»7£ A _% V 4- ; M _ 92'v i H». 1-. } Address City ;v_:;;'-,_»'. ;.,§;.~92 _¢-_ .,_,_ t» '71»?- -§1;:;92_~92_.;_._ ;!I fiat ..,..,.z - : i.~»<.~..~1-'r_'=-' 2; > . cw l.,. ,4; .m.._...W...i l_-t.-c....~..m.....i..,,...... ; Zip x Email State , I lssisééiil -q--.~_.~-.-c-...... 1 ~.....-..~,W,..-.... Wall ...... _..._...... -.._....-_92...... sE __-_____._._____ii____i Click "Continue"to proceedto our secure server 2%!! v advcrtisermznt >4 ., 2.,~N=..t;31:;- 0 ~»@=.~ ».~ ; I I I .i _ » ._> ~- M,-_'.r_;,I .1 tzwg '3 : »I.A H C formula am Grdllsnhonlscf,.oi§ii»§tor;;~i¢or»i§ ti? M §§§t3§E3 §'~1? gm, Copyright ©2005 U.S.News &World Report,L.P. Allrights reserved. Use ofthis Website constitutesacceptance ofour Terms and Conditionsof Use and PrivacyPolicy. Si-LISQEEi i'_<-:_ztt_Iod.cxl IEr_ms_&,_C_onditlons 1 Privacy Policy |,Contact,U,.S.,,New$l .Ad_i@11ls§. l _BLQwseL$; hm: //vvvvwusnews.com/usnews/ogre/articles/050425/25csi_6.htm Q 5/10/2005 " 7 -4"" generally_ L Page Sr.Opp. lnPl.'s Defs.' To J. l92/lot. [88]6, gnm. at PSDMF21; Further $5.!l whereas Detective 1 of6 Smit's summarytestimony concerningthe investigationis basedon evidence,Detective Thomas theories appearto lack substantial evidentiarysupport. ld. ! indeed, while DetectiveSmit is an experiencedand respected homicidedetective, DetectiveThomas had no investigativeexperience concerninghomicide cases prior tothis case. Smit. Dep.at 69.! In short,the plaintiff'sevidence thatthe defendantskilled theirdaughter and coveredup their crime is based on little morethan the fact that defendants werepresent inthe house during the murder. , As the arguments inhis brief opposing defendants summaryjudgment motionare largelyrestatements ofthe arguments hemakes insupport of his effortsto have the testimonyof his forensic documentexaminers admitted, plaintiffimplicitly acknowledgesthe dearth of physicalevidence supportinghis argument. See id. at 3, 5-6,9-10,13-19.! inshort, theonly hardevidence, asML IHFU;mTm_:WMIM! HEREIN I3 UIIICLI1.53IFIE]II ===::::='-1::==::.'::======:=Z==:======DATE ;2_l|:|__2|:||:|E B? 5U32_.;l UL B_@J,L,.'R5_92,'L5|: possible associationwith the case and received summariesof the Boulder authorities handwriting evidence, which concludedthat Mrs. Ramsey probablydid not write the Ransom Note. J. Ramsey Dep. at 12, 62 & 73- 74.! He also assertsthat he had no reason todoubt anyof this information. Id.at 73-74.! As a matter of law, he is entitled to rely on this information.See NewYork Times Co v. Conner, 365F.2d 567,576 th Cir. 1966! defendant entitled to rely on single source even if source one-sided!. See also McFarlane v. Sheridan Square Press, lnc., 91 F.3d 1501, 1510 D.C. Cir. 1996! stating there is no independent duty to corroborate information, if no reason to doubt truthfulness.! Page 82 __ _ opposed to theories, that plaintiff proffers to support his accusation that Mrs.Ramsey murdered her child is evidence indicating that she wrote the Ransom Note. The Court agrees with plaintiff that, if plaintiff adduced clear and convincing evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the Ransom Note, this evidence would then be sufficient to create a jury issue as to whether Mrs. Ramsey killed her child. In other words, if Mrs. Ramsey wrote the Ransom Note, this Court could conclude, as could a reasonable jury, that she was involved in the murder of her child. ' The questionthen is whether plaintiffhas profferedsuch clearand convincingevidence. ThisCourt hasearlier ruled that plaintiffs expert, Mr. Epstein, is quali ed to compare Mrs. Ramsey'shandwriting with that contained in the Ransom Note for the purposes of pointing out similarities in the two. The Court, however, has concluded that Epstein cannot properly testify that he is certain that Mrs. Ramsey was the author of the Note. For purposes of assessing whether plaintiff has met its burden of proof, however, the Court will analyze the evidence, assuming that Epstein could testify as to his proffered conclusion, as well as assuming that he could testify only as to similarities between both the Ransom Note and Mrs. Ramsey's knownhandwriting samples. Page 83 ' 5 . Analysis of the Two Theories a. Considerationof Epstein .Testimony ThatThere Were Similarities BetweenMrs. Ramsey .Handwriting and the Ransom Note As discussedsupra, muchof the physical evidenceis consistentwith an inference thatan intrudercame into http://vvwvv.angelfire.com/ar3/jonbenet/judgecarnes9.html 5/10/2005 0'}* .92 Q Page 2 of6 2 Ramsey'shomemurdered and child. their Specifically, therea brokeneidowwas in thebasement and e window well for that window showed signs that someone may have entered the house through it. indeed, ime of the foliage and debris from that window well was found in the room where JonBenet s bodywas und. Further, the evidence of stun gun injuries to JonBenet suggests that she was taken by someone who anted to keep herquiet as he removedher fromher bedroom;a parent would notneed a stun gun toremove child from her bedroom. Conversely, the use of a stun gun by the killer is totally at odds with plaintiff'stheory rat the violence against JonBenet began by Mrs. Ramsey accidentally hit her daughter's onhead the bathtub r bathroom oor. in addition, the presence of a bag containing a rope in a guest bedroom near JonBenet s rguably supportsa notion that somepremeditation andpreparation attendedthe crime. L !ther physical evidence is consistent with a theory that an intruder was in the home. There was a recently wade shoeprint,in a moldy area in the basement, that matched no shoes owned by the Ramseys. Therewas ilso a palmprint on the door to the small room Page 84 where JonBenet s body wasfound that did not match the Ramseys prints. DNA evidence was further consistent with the possibility of an intruder, as JonBenet had the DNA of an unknown male under some of her ngernails and on her underpants. The evidence also indicated that JonB92enet hadbeen sexually assaulted and her vagina contained wood bers from the paint brush used to fashion the garotte. The method by which JonBenet was killed also suggests it more likely that she was killed by an intruder than by hermother. JonBenetwas strangledthrough theuse of a garotte and bondagedevice that was sophisticated and employed the use of a series of tightly and neatly made knots that would appear to have taken some time to make. There is no evidence that the defendants had the skill to create such a device. Moreover, itis plaintiffstheory that,after thinkingshe hadaccidentally killedher daughter,Mrs. Ramsey worked quickly, before the household awoke, to set up a staged kidnapping scenario.The creation of this bondage devicewould appearto haverequired moretime andcalm thanone wouldthink Mrs.Ramsey could have musteredunder thecircumstances. _ Plaintiff has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the Ramseys murderedtheir child; they have no burden to prove that they did not commit the crime. The above recited evidence falls well short of the requisite proof that the Page 85 defendants killedtheir child.Plaintiff argues,however, thatthe RansomNote providesthis necessaryproof. At firstblush, andeven withoutan appraisalof thehandwriting, theRansom Noteseems tosupport plaintiff's argument thatthe kidnappingwas a hoax set upby someonein thehouse. ltis anextremely long and detailed note of over three pages. Moreover, an examination of the notepad on which the note was written indicates that thewriter hadattempted someearlier draftsof the note. In addition, thewriter hadapparently noteven brought hisown materials,but insteadhad useda notepad andfelt markerfromthe Ramsey'shome. These facts suggest that thekiller hadnot comeprepared witha ransomnote alreadywritten, asone wouldexpect a diligent kidnapperto do. Further, onedoes notassume that an intruder,intent onbeating ahasty retreat,would take thetime to practicewriting a note or to write a long, detailed note. Theseassumptions thenmight suggest that someone in the house contrived the note. http://www.angelfire.com/ar3/jonbenet/judgecarnes9.html 5/10/2005 ~ Defendants'_ Pageargued, haveit however,is just plausible as the killergdthatbeen away hidingthe 3in of 6home for many hours, waitingfor the household togo to sleep, beforehe sprunginto action.That waitingtime would have allowedhim the leisure towrite a note. Further, thelength oftime that it took to practice and writethe note could also conceivably undermine a notion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote it. Under plaintiff'sscenario, Page 86 92 Mrs. Ramsey was working quickly to create a staged crime scene before her husband and son awoke. Given those time constraints, andpresumably a desire to provide as little handwriting aspossible forpurposes of future analysis,she arguablywould not have writtensuch a long note. Accordingly,the existenceof this peculiar, longRansom Notedoes not necessarily favor,as the killer, eitheran intruderor Mrs. Ramsey. Thus, the only conceivablepiece of evidence by whichplaintiff canhope to carry his burden ofproof is evidence thatindicates thatMrs. Ramseyactually wrotethe note. Factoring intothe analysisthe testimonyof Mr. Epsteinthat there are similarities betweenMrs. Ramsey'shandwriting andthe RansomNote doesnot, - however, enableplaintiff to meet thatburden. Thefact that there may be similaritiesbetween thetwo hardly constitutes persuasiveevidence thatMrs. Ramseyactually wrotethe Note. Without thatproof, plaintiffcannot show that Mrs. Ramsey was the killer. b. Considerationof Epstein .Testimony ThatHe WasAbsolutely Certainthat Mrs. Ramaey Wrotethe Ransom Note The Courthas earlierindicated itsconclusion thatthere is insufficient reliability toMr. Epstein smethodology to permit himto state his conclusionthat Mrs. Ramsey wrotethe Ransom Note. Asnoted supra,Epstein opined that he is "10O percent certain"that Patsy Ramsey wrotethe Ransom Note andthat "there 92 Page 87 is absolutely no doubt" that she is the author. Supraat 51. The Court believes itsconclusion onthe admissibility ofthis evidenceto becorrect. Further,as the identify ofthe writeris virtuallythe onlyevidence that plaintiffcan offerto shoulder itsburden, thenthe questionof theidentity ofthe writeris synonymouswith the underlyingquestion inthis litigation:did Mrs. Ramsey killher child. Nevertheless, evenif the Court wereto permit Epsteinto testifyas to the aboveconclusion, theCourt does not believe histestimony wouldprovide the "clear andconvincing evidence"necessary fora reasonable nder offact toconclude thatMrs. Ramseywrote the note. As statedbefore, "clearand convincing"evidence requires"a clearconviction, withouthesitancy ofthe truth." Cruzan v.Director, MissouriDepartment ofHealth, 497U.S. 261,2BS n.11 990! . The parties haveagreed r that handwritinganalysis is,at best,an inexactand subjectivetool usedto provideprobative, butnot clearand convincing evidence,of a questioned document's author. SMF 212; PSMF 212.!Nonetheless, theCourt will assume thatthere couldbe cases where the handwritingin questionis eitherso obviouslynot thehandwriting of a particular individualor so close a match to that person's penmanship,that a finder of fact could comfortably relyon thehandwriting, alone,to reacha particular conclusion. indeed,well beforethe days of forensic handwritingexperts, courtshave allowedlay witnessesto http://www.angelfire.com/ar3/jonbenet/judgecarnes9. html 5/10/2005 ,» R<-age 81 B- P G age 4 f6 O testify thatthey recognizedthe handwritingof particulardocuments asthe handwritingof someonewith whose penmanship they were familiar. Further, appropriate testimony of forensic experts can greatly assist the july in its undertaking. That said, while there may be cases in which handwriting examination, alone, can be dispositive, this case is not one of that group. Here, as noted, several factors necessarily reduce the weight a reasonable juror could give to Epstein's conclusion.First, Epstein did not consult the original Ransom Note nor obtain original exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. Second, as noted by defendants, Epstein deviated from the very methodology that he has previously asserted was necessary to make a reasoned judgment. Most significant to the Court in its determination that Epstein'sconclusion cannot carry the day for plaintiff, however, is the unanimity of opinion among six other experts that Mrs. Ramsey cannot be determined to have been the writer of the Note. As noted supra, the Boulder Police Department and District Attorney'sOffice had consulted six other handwriting experts,all of whom reviewedthe original Ransom Noteand exemplars.Supra at21-22. Although two of these expertswere hired by defendants,four were independent expertshired bythe pol ice. Noneof ' these six experts wereable to identify Mrs.Ramsey as the author ofthe Ransom Note. Instead,their consensus was that she "probably did not write the Ransom Note. Supra at n. 14. Page A89 Given the contrary opinionof six other experts,whose abilityto examinethe documentswas necessarily superior to Epstein's,given and Epstein'sfailure to explain themethodology bywhich he can makeabsolute pronouncements concerning the authorship of a document, this Court does not believe that a reasonable jury could concludethat Mrs. Ramsey wasthe authorof the Ransom Note,solely onthe basis of Epstein s r professed opinionto that effect. ln reaching thisconclusion, theCourt is aware that it is not permittedto make credibilityjudgments inruling onsummary judgmentmotions. Forexample, werethere six eyewitnesses on one side of a question and one eyewitness onthe other side, the Court wouldnot take from a jury the factual question onwhich these witnesses were testifying. With regardto Epstein'stestimony, however,the Court is not attemptingto assess credibility. Mr. Epsteinmay sincerelybelieve thatMrs. Ramseywrote the Note and thejury may well credit his sincerity.Nevertheless, nomatter howearnest Epsteinmay be,the fact remains that he has not explained hisbasis for reaching absolutecertainty inhis conclusionand, accordingly,the weight and impact of his testimonywould necessarilybe less than the weight of the contrary testimonyof six other experts.39 .____.__._-...._.___-_..._.._.._---.__-_ __.---_-_-.___,____._ 39 TheCourt's judgmenton thismatter theis samewhether these other six expertswere asvague concerning their methodology as wasEpstein orwhether they,ip fact,gave solidexplanations fortheir reasoning. Page 90 g ln sum, plaintiff hasfailed to prove thatMrs. Ramseywrote the Ransom Noteand has thereby necessarily failed to prove that she murderedher daughter.! Moreover, the"weight ofthe evidenceis more consistent with a theory that an intruder murderedJonBenet thanit is with a theory that Mrs. Ramsey didso. For that reason, plaintiff hasfailed to establish thatwhen defendantswrote the Book, they"in fact entertained seriousdoubts as to the truth of the publication."St. Amantv. Thompson,390 U.S. 727, 731 968!; Hemenway v. Blanchard, http://wvvvv.angelfire.com/ar3/jonbenet/judgecarnes9.html 5/10/2005 163_ L App. Ga.671-72, 668,S.E.9603, i 294 982!. 606 Accordingly,the GRANTSCourt s Page motion 5ofdefendants 6 for summaryjudgmentas to plaintiffs libel claim. I lll. Slander ln additionto hisclaims forlibel, plaintiffasserts that.several statementsmade bydefendants tothe pressfit within oneof thecategories ofslander perse recognizedby Georgialaw: imputingto anothera crime punishable bylaw. O.C.G.A.?51-5-4 a! . ln particular, plaintiffrefers to defendants March24, 2000 appearance onthe TodayShow withhost KatieCouric. During.the courseof thebroadcast, thefollowing conversation occurred: Katie Couric:You pepperthe bookwith eetingreferences tosome otherpeople thatyou seemto question. You talkabout Bill McReynolds, who playedSanta at your Christmas party.You alsomention hiswife who,in a strange twist, wrote a - Page 91 _ play years before abouta girl murdered ina basement. John Ramsey:The pointin the book wasto clarify from ourviewpoint thesewhy peoplehave beenmentioned a lot in themedia, andalso to point outthat thereare legitimateleads thatneed tobe followed. Katie Couric:You alsomention ChrisWolfe, a total stranger whosegirlfriend reportedthat hedisappeared on Christmas nightand was veiy agitated, rather--when hewatched thenews ofthe murderon TV. John Ramsey:Uh-huh affirmative!. i Katie Couric:Why do you mentionhim. John Ramsey:Because he'dbeen widely mentioned thein news.And wewanted toclarify thefacts thatwe knew. . John Ramsey:l can tell youwhen--when wefirst startedlooking at--atone particularlead earlyon--My reaction was, -Thisis it.This isthe killer."And ourinvestigator said,-"Whoa, whoa,whoa." He'dsay, "Don't do a Boulder Police on me. Don't torush conclusions." Transcript Todayof Show,March 24,2000.! emphasisadded! Theparties agreethat, as Mr. Ramseymade the laststatement, NBCdisplayed a picture of ChrisWolf onthe screen.- As withthe libelousstatements discussedabove, whilenot textbook,these statementsare arguably slanderous. With the Page 92 / slander claim,however, thefactual predicatefor plaintiffsmalice argumentis weaker than withthe libel claim. Specifically, althoughthe emphasizedquote suggestsMr. Ramsey'sbelief that an unnamedsuspect mightbe http://www.angelfire.com/ar3/jonbenet/judgecarnes9.html 5/10/2005 the killer--whichwasmalicious a if stagnant,Mr.Ramsey that $knewwas histhe killer--plaintiffPagehas 6 of 6not demonstrated thatdefendant JohnRamsey intendedto refer to plaintiff when he'madethat statement. Moreover, eventhough thephotograph ofplaintiff appearedon thescreen whendefendant madethe statement, isit undisputedthat defendanthad nocontrol overNBC s editingdecisions. - Nevertheless, evenhaddefendant intendedto referto plaintiff, the statementsare still not malicious,for the reasons discussedsupra, withregard tothe libelclaim. Accordingly,the CourtGRANTS defendants motion for summary judgmentas to, plaintiffs slander claim. CONCLUSION For theforegoing reasons,the CourtGRANTS defendants motion forsummaryjudgment [67];GRANTS asto Ms. Wongand GRANTSin partand DENIESin partas to Mr. Epstein defendants motion inlimine to exclude the testimonyof Cina Wong andGideon Epstein[68]; andDENIES defendants motion fororal argument[79]. Page 93 SO ORDERED,this 31 day of March, 2003. Julie E. Carnes United StatesDistrict Judge r_._, .1 Hosted¥]|q,',gj;j'f'g bg Search: 5 Ange| reC Webby' _M_ _ yWM :_:__ ~|~ Virus protection Guide Safe-IT Online EuroStore Which Virus Remover? Virus Protection Free Getting Started Guide & Download Now-Desktop 4 Side-by-side Comparisons Free Disease Prevention More - Security white papers Security Suite File of Top Virus Removers. Tips! 10 Must Do Live Long and research Encryption, Secure Disk etc. 100% Free Scans! and e B He thyal security.bilpipe.com/ www.Safeit.com SpywareRemoversReview.com HealthMBA.com Build an Online Photo Album 1Y_§5.|Q9QiI1Q_ 9.L_FB_E§_ http://wvvvv.angelfire.com/ar3/ionbenet/judgecarnes9.html 5/10/2005 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DELETED PAGE INFORI -.-'I.ATION SHEET Ne Duplieatien Fees are eharged fer Deleted Page Infe natien Sheet s Tetal Deleted Page{s! ~ T6 Page 3 ~ h , IJTC, IJTD Page -4 ~ h , IJTC, IJTD Page Page Page Page Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Tl s Page Page Page Page Page Page