Maybe not, maybe they learned a long time ago. Will the judge ask? If it did take 3 years, why so long? My position is that they weren't testing it for what it was, but for what they hoped it be, perhaps with the disinformative persuasion of helpful outsiders, and the FBI only got their kick in the pants in the Nov. 2003 Science article - the date of the FBI's claim of "new" testings, ie, tests they negelected to do before.
It's a disgraceful scandal, hope someone spills the beans in the future.
BTW, yes, IMO, this leak is a preemptive "strike" to make the judge think there is validity to this "new' claim from the mere authority of it's retelling in the media. I'm sure of this because the Shane article was planted today in just one other publication: The South Florida Sun-Sentinel, the same place as the one other anthrax law suit, the AMI one. Coplete scam, expect more delays unless Hatfill's lawyers explain the delays, and pose why the heck is another delay needed due to scientific tests.
Shermy: Maybe not, maybe they learned a long time ago.
According to the article, "The discovery... was made at least a year ago."
So, presuming that the story isn't a lie that was just made up when needed, this information has been withheld for at least a year. The leak was made at this time for some particular reason; it would appear that the purpose of the information release is to extend the lawsuit delay. We'll see.
Man, even the thoroughly moronic Nick Kristof has decided not to further embarrass himself by following this inane saga. Who's the Sun Sentinel's useful idiot counterpart to Scott Shane?