Documents explain early FBI interest in Hatfill as anthrax suspect

Posted on Tuesday, November 25, 2008 5:29 PM ET
Filed Under:

By Pete Williams, NBC News Justice Correspondent

Government documents made public Tuesday shed new light on the FBI's interest in Dr. Steven Hatfill, the former government scientist who was an early focus of much of the government's energy in investigating the 2001 anthrax mail attacks.

The government later ruled him out and agreed to pay him nearly $6 million to settle a lawsuit alleging violations of his privacy. The documents were drawn up to seek court approval for searching Hatfill's home, car, and storage locker, and the apartment of his girlfriend. They show that the FBI was deeply interested in Hatfill's background and what it considered an inconsistency in his statements about his activities around the time the letters were mailed.

According to an FBI investigator who sought the search warrants, Hatfill boasted of serving as a mercenary for the military in Rhodesia from 1979 to 1980, "during the very years Rhodesian military and intelligence units are believed to have employed toxic chemicals and biological agents against rebels in the closing years of a long and brutal civil war." During that period, the documents said, Rhodesia experienced the worst outbreak of anthrax in world history, confined to areas held by anti-government insurgents.

The search warrant applications said he also claimed to have advised Rhodesian sources on how to lace clothing with poison for distribution in provinces held by rebels.

The FBI also showed an intense interest in Hatfill's prescriptions for the antibiotic Cipro, which was then, and is now, considered the most effective for treatment of anthrax infections. FBI agents said he twice filled a prescription for Cipro at a pharmacy near his house -- each time, exactly two days before anthrax letters were mailed in September and October of 2001. But, the documents say, Hatfill denied that he took any of the medication during that period.

The search warrant applications also contain publicly known aspects of Hatfill's past, including a novel he wrote but never published about how terrorists could release deadly materials like anthrax in the US. They also note that he had once said that anthrax would be the biological agent most likely to be used in a terror attack.

"Our repeated experience has been that people make wild accusations in secret, only to retract them under public questioning," said Tom Connolly, Hatfill's lawyer, in response to Tuesday's document release. "Whether or not it was right for the government to rely on this kind of information to obtain a search warrant in 2002, we know in 2008 that Steven Hatfill had nothing to do with the anthrax attacks. It will be unfortunate for all involved if the release of these documents misleads anyone into thinking otherwise," he said.

Both Hatfill and the Justice Department opposed making the documents public, but a federal judge ordered them released at the request of news organizations. They claimed the material would provide a window into the FBI's performance during a case of national importance.

Comments

Someone would have to posess a higher-than-average intelligence to be accepted, and go on to productively work for, a government agency engaged in such advanced biochemistry. As such, Mr. Hatfill would surely have had the insight to predict how his words and actions would bring intense scrutiny to bear upon him. To the average Joe such as myself, his boasting would be considered outlandish. But given the circles his career would have forced him to travel in, that same boasting would have raised obvious alarms. At best, he would be deemed by his peers of being unstable and incapable of discretionary judgment. At worst, someone far more sinister.
Not to deny the government's transgressions when it comes to improper investigating techniques; still, one cannot fault the government for what could only be a natural gravitation to suspecting Mr. Hatfill based on his words and deeds. I certainly would have left no stone unturned; especially while knowing that all of America was fearful, and more lives were at stake,
The similarities are enough in my mind to be given a search warrant. Typically where there is smoke there is fire. It would be different if the guy din't know Anthrax from Borax but A merc in Rhodesia, that's quite boastful and a little weird. Why purchase Cipro if your not going to take it? I know if I purchase anti-biotics I need to take them for some ailment. Something is rotten in Denmark.
The information the FBI used in this case would seem to make up a reasonable suspicion that Hatfill could be involved in the attacks.  I don't know what the burden of evidence is when requesting a search warrant to investigate a person of interest in such a case.  I notice there is no direct evidence, only circumstantial, suggesting Hatfill might be involved, but obviously the judge who issued the warrant found the information compelling enough.

I wonder about the lawsuit and settlement.  If it was reasonable to investigate Hatfill based on the information given, why the settlement?  Unless the FBI and judge both were overzealous in obtaining and approving the warrant.  Law enforcement needs to be able to investigate leads, so I hope the settlement was not made simply to keep things quiet, and save the time, money, and publicity of a court case.

I feel for Mr. Hatfill, and any other person wrongly accused of a crime.  I just hope our legal system is not hobbled by excessive restrictions.  (I'm all for vigorous protection of citizen's rights under the constitution and all applicable laws.)
While it is good to see the government opening up these records, the information within them is not new. These issues were all aired in the media a number of years ago. The government should be less concerned about making points in the media than in developing a strong case for the courts to decide. Too often in this administration (and others) we have seen senior law enforcement officials attempting to try a case in the media on the flimsiest of data in order to score a short-term victory rather than developing the solid evidence necessary to achieve a rightful conviction. In addition to Mr. Hatfill's situation, the case of Richard Jewell comes to mind.


Send a comment

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

About the blog

Deep Background is NBC News’ investigative blog. It covers national security, terrorism, spies, Iraq, and politics, as well as government waste, fraud and abuse. It is edited by NBC News Senior Investigative Producer Jim Popkin.

Archives


Browse by topic:

Add this blog to your news reader