| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:37 pm Post subject: Anthrax continued: "...he didn't kill himself," |
 |
|
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=79878
| Quote: |
Ivins, a Fort Detrick anthrax specialist, had become the sole focus of a seven-year FBI investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks that killed five and injured 17. The FBI has since released evidence it claims proves Ivins' guilt, but has admitted much of it is circumstantial.
Assaad, who worked in a U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease lab at Fort Detrick from 1989 to 1997 developing a vaccine for ricin, said in an interview Saturday he does not believe Ivins was guilty.
"He's a great man. He's honorable, sincere, honest and most important, he didn't kill five people and he didn't kill himself," Assaad said. |
Click on the link for the full article. If his co-worker's claim is correct, and he in fact didn't kill himself, that would leave only one other option, he was murdered.
So with the testimony of his coworker in mind, and the recent admission by FBI that they don't have much worthy evidence against him, which option is becoming more likely, suicide or murder? Occam's razor will help with this one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Weak. Don't compound the FBI error matching weak evidence with weak evidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| So with the testimony of his coworker in mind, and the recent admission by FBI that they don't have much worthy evidence against him, which option is becoming more likely, suicide or murder? |
Are you entirely sure you know what circumstantial evidence means? If circumstantial evidence were 'weak', why do the bad guys on Law & Order always go pale when the detective says, "The DNA matches"?
Besides, how much credibility does a 'friend' have? After every serial killer is caught the media finds a neighbor lady who says, "He was such a quiet boy. Always kind to animals and small children."
Being that you are a truther, doesn't that mean you have a predisposition to look for conspiracies? |
When I referred to weak evidence I was referring to a previous article I posted, not this one. I would search for it and link you to it if I actually thought you cared about this issue; but I think we both know you don't, so I won't (in case I am wrong, go back to the second or third page of this sub-forum and look for it).
As for your second point. The friend didn't simply say, "he was a nice guy", he also stated explicitly that he didn't kill 5 people and he didn't kill himself. There is a difference there.
For your third point, I have a predisposition to lean toward anything that has the most evidence pointing in that direction. Perhaps you could call it a predisposition to use intelligence and critical thought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Weak. Don't compound the FBI error matching weak evidence with weak evidence. |
Pardon me? You aren't making much sense here. Care to elaborate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Weak. Don't compound the FBI error matching weak evidence with weak evidence. |
Pardon me? You aren't making much sense here. Care to elaborate? |
The FBI case, by its own admission, has no smoking gun evidence. It's a lot of weak evidence. Many scientists dispute the FBI claims. I'm happy to supply references. My position is his suicide is not a clear admission of guilt. There are other likely explanations why an innocent scientist would take his life upon being informed he was a suspect in this case.
Your position is somewhat unclear but I'm reading you think the FBI has killed him to make it appear like they have a stronger case? And I would assume you would also argue the FBI evidence against him is weak. Now your evidence that he didn't commit suicide is simply the opinion of a single person? Is that strong evidence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Weak. Don't compound the FBI error matching weak evidence with weak evidence. |
Pardon me? You aren't making much sense here. Care to elaborate? |
The FBI case, by its own admission, has no smoking gun evidence. It's a lot of weak evidence. Many scientists dispute the FBI claims. I'm happy to supply references. My position is his suicide is not a clear admission of guilt. There are other likely explanations why an innocent scientist would take his life upon being informed he was a suspect in this case.
Your position is somewhat unclear but I'm reading you think the FBI has killed him to make it appear like they have a stronger case? And I would assume you would also argue the FBI evidence against him is weak. Now your evidence that he didn't commit suicide is simply the opinion of a single person? Is that strong evidence? |
I was unclear on your position here. I remember you posting a link to an article that listed all the evidence the FBI had. Perhaps I just assumed you thought it was a closed case.
I do not think the FBI killed him. I suspect someone else did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| I suspect someone else did. |
Based on a guess and weak evidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| I suspect someone else did. |
Based on a guess and weak evidence. |
Based on circumstantial evidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If I were the FBI I'd be looking into this guys connection with the Tylenol tainting a few years back. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| I suspect someone else did. |
Based on a guess and weak evidence. |
Based on circumstantial evidence. |
Circumstantial evidence = weak evidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| I suspect someone else did. |
Based on a guess and weak evidence. |
Based on circumstantial evidence. |
Circumstantial evidence = weak evidence. |
This is not true MM2.
| Quote: |
Circumstantial evidence is a collection of facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown.
...
Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning.
...
...nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence[clarify], and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of "purposely" or "knowingly," the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| I suspect someone else did. |
Based on a guess and weak evidence. |
Based on circumstantial evidence. |
Circumstantial evidence = weak evidence. |
This is not true MM2.
| Quote: |
Circumstantial evidence is a collection of facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown.
...
Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning.
...
...nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence[clarify], and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of "purposely" or "knowingly," the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence |
Okay I'll grant you that. But other than someone who simply asserts the person he knew couldn't have killed himself, what other lines of evidence do you have? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| I suspect someone else did. |
Based on a guess and weak evidence. |
Based on circumstantial evidence. |
Circumstantial evidence = weak evidence. |
This is not true MM2.
| Quote: |
Circumstantial evidence is a collection of facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown.
...
Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning.
...
...nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence[clarify], and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of "purposely" or "knowingly," the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence |
Okay I'll grant you that. But other than someone who simply asserts the person he knew couldn't have killed himself, what other lines of evidence do you have? |
I'll put a list together. But for starters, tylenol and codeine is not a very effective way to kill oneself. It takes between 24-48 hours to overdose and it is very painful, and certainly not always going to work. I presume a scientist of his stature would know several other more effective, less painful and quicker ways to off himself.
Look up tylenol overdose information and you will see what I am saying. It has nasty overdose side effects. His last day of life would have been utterly miserable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
