Maybe, but the circumstantial evidence against Ivins is far more damning that anything they had on Hatfill. > Ivins had been the sole custodian of a large flas

Maybe, but the circumstantial evidence against Ivins is far more damning that anything they had on Hatfill. > Ivins had been the sole custodian of a large flask of highly purified anthrax spores genetically linked to those found in the letters. He had allegedly submitted purposely misleading lab data to the FBI in an attempt to hide the fact that the strain of anthrax used in the attacks was a genetic match with the anthrax in his possession.