Here are the judge’s March 16, 2020 Order and Memorandum opinion giving his final ruling.  For a general explanation of the anthrax mailings case, see Was Abderraouf Jdey the Anthrax Mailer?  The judge does not appear to have read it.

Of the documents, the first set was released by FBI in the course of the litigation.  The second set includes selected lawsuit documents from Dillon v. U.S. Department of Justice.  Following this is a discussion of possible destruction of evidence. 

The first set includes 102 pages of emails to and from accused Mailer Bruce Ivins, released by FBI on court order on March 20, 2019, plus Laboratory Notebook 4282. FOIA request #1327397 sought Ivins’s emails and other documents for September and October, 2001. FOIA request #1329530 sought the Table of Contents and the 16 pages on Ivins from the 2000-page Interim Major Case Summary of 2006.  After repeated failures to find emails, FBI experts located them as 1A attachments in the Amerithrax file.

Set 1:  Documents released by FBI


Notebook 4282 Part 1 Redacted

Notebook 4282 Part 2 Redacted


Set 2:  Selected documents from Dillon v. U.S. Department of Justice.

FOIA #1327397:  Ivins-related emails and other documents from Sept. and Oct. 2001:  ivinsfoiarequest

FOIA #1329350:  Interim Major Case Summary table of contents and 16 pages on Ivins: imcsfirstrequest

Dillon’s Complaint:  anthraxcomplaint

Dillon’s Counsel’s letter to Department of Justice, February 8, 2018:  hodesdoj2818

Department of Justice’s Motion for Summary Judgment, June 15, 2018:  dojsumjudg61518

First Declaration of David Hardy, Chief of FBI’s Record/Information Dissemination Section, June 15, 2018:  hardydeclaration61518

Dillon’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, Points and Authorities, July 16, 2018:  pointsauthorities

Opinion of Judge Rudolph Contreras, January 17, 2019:  contrerasopinion11719

Dillon’s explanation of destruction of evidence, February 19, 2019:  opposition21919

Fourth Declaration of David Hardy, March 19, 2019:  hardyfourthdeclaration31919

Dillon’s explanation of implications of discovery of emails, April 4, 2019:  response4419no34

DOJ’s Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment, June 14, 2019:  38-2 – Seidel declaration

Dillon’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, July 30, 2019:  41 – Pl opposition to MSJ

DOJ’s Opposition and Reply, September 12, 2019:  45 – Def Reply MSJ

Dillon’s Reply, October 15, 2019:  47 – Pl CMSJ reply


Destruction of Evidence?

There are reasons to suspect that someone has destroyed evidence potentially exculpatory of Bruce Ivins.

In the First Declaration of David Hardy, he describes on p. 14 how he found a copy of the IMCS:

In response to FOIA Number 1329350, the FBI conducted a CRS [Central Records System] search using the term “Interim Major Case Summary” and located no records. The FBI then conducted an index search using the term “Amerithrax” which resulted in one investigative file. The FBI electronically reviewed the investigative file and was unable to locate the IMCS. Next, the FBI contacted the subject matter experts at the Washington Field Office and requested their assistance. The Washington Field Office reviewed the physical investigative file and was unable to locate the IMCS. The Washington Field Office reached out to the FBI’s Laboratory Services in Quantico, Virginia, who located the IMCS and sent it to RMD [Records Management Division] for processing.

Thus searching the three most logical places for the IMCS–the index, the digital investigative file, and the physical investigative file–proved fruitless, and a copy of the IMCS needed to be found at another location.  According to IMCS author Richard Lambert, he uploaded digital copies of the IMCS and its distribution list to the Amerithrax investigative file in 2006.  So FBI’s search failed to find a copy that should have been there.  A person intent on destroying evidence might have focused solely on the IMCS because its chapter on Ivins concentrated the potentially exculpatory evidence and arguments.  Trying to destroy all the individual pieces of evidence in FBI’s possession would have been a very difficult task and could have aroused suspicion. 



Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Copyright © Scientia Press, 2024