That has no bearing on the point I was making.
His lawyer is the one who claims he was beloved by his friends and family.
I just pointed out that the lawyer isn’t being entirely honest. He knows about the estranged brother, and he knows it isn’t truthful to imply that he was beloved by his whole family.
Anthrax case : Ivins is innocent, suspected for political reasons - VANITY
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2058470/posts
A lawyer not being entirely honest? You are kidding!
But, just for the heck of it, let’s parse what the lawyer actually said. Does “family” include only immediate family or parents and all siblings who were not living together with Bruce Ivins? And am I just not seeing the “whole” quoted in “his friends and family”? And is “estranged brother” that had not seen Bruce Ivins for 20 years and said he “was not sorry to see him dead” really a “family”?
And do we really need to be like some in FBI and nitpick a “family” to “prove” that his lawyer “isn’t being entirely honest”? I’ll take it as a given.