Her allegations, rather her "protrait" were important. She spoke privately with Senate staffers just before pressure was applied on the Justice Dept. In Hatfill's first speech he referred to her and her allegations - refuting allegations and querying why she would target him.
I understand that, but if they haven't found anything credible to back up her allegations during the course of the 18-month investigation, why haven't they backed down at some earlier point in time? They seem to be going further down the road with this and drawing more attention to the investigation. When I think back to Ashcroft's confirmation hearings and how Leahy and the judiciary committee tried to paint him as a racist, I have a hard time believing that he would play that game here. Maybe I'm wrong in assuming that Ashcroft and the Justice Department is running this investigation.