All language subtitles for Bull.4x17.Sub-ITA

Hi. My name's Michael Weatherly.

Tonight's episode of Bull
deals with a citywide panic

not unlike the fears
and concerns

people are experiencing all over
the world at this moment.

Before we start,
we wanted to remind you:

this is a work of fiction.

It was written
and filmed months ago.

And its only purpose
is to entertain you.

And that will do it for
the headlines for the 9:00 hour.

We will see you back here
at 9:30.

For New York News 3,
I'm Allison Rojas.

And we're out.

Nice broadcast.

- Thanks.
- That new shade of lipstick, that looks great on camera.

Who would send me

a birthday card
two months before my birthday?

Okay, this is not funny.

- Oh, no. It's in your hair.
- It's everywhere.

- I have to be back on the air in 23 and a half minutes.
- No, I'll get-get,

Uh, wardrobe and makeup.

Hurry.

Yesterday morning,
my wife... she woke up achy, nauseous.

She had a bit of a fever,
said her chest hurt.

We thought it was the flu.

But then, today,
she started coughing up blood.

Attendant,

- let's get her to Room One.
- Yes, Doctor.

Let's page Dr. Farmer
and the chief,

and then alert the Health
Department and the CDC.

The-the CDC?

Center for Disease Control?
What's going on?

Government buildings

remain closed
and subway ridership

is at its lowest level
since 9/11

as anthrax terror grips
Manhattan.

A quiet panic has descended
on the city

as New Yorkers are trying
to figure out who's behind this

and when it will end.

At this hour,
the death toll remains at two.

The deceased are Katie Connors,

who opened a birthday card
addressed to her husband,

Manhattan Congressman
Peter Connors,

and Emmanuel Bakry, the postal
worker who delivered it.

But, finally, some good news.

News 3's Allison Rojas
is responding to treatment

after opening an anthrax-laden
greeting card

in this very studio
more than a week ago.

Doctors expect her and the four
other News 3 staffers

who were taken ill
to make a full recovery.

Folks, we're about to roll,
so I need quiet.

Five, four,

three, two...

Good afternoon from ground zero.

Here in Manhattan we're all
collectively holding our breath,

waiting for the next
anthrax-laden shoe to drop.

With that thought in mind,
we thought we'd pay a visit

to Hudson University, which is
one of the foremost laboratories

for the study of chemical
weapons and bio-pathogens.

We wanted to talk
with Dr. Roger Simpkins,

a microbiologist and researcher
who runs this lab,

which is financed
in a combination of funding

from the university
and the government.

Dr. Simpkins,
any words of wisdom

or homespun advice
for our viewers tuning in,

missing work and school,
doing everything they can

to keep themselves
from becoming a victim,

falling ill,
possibly even dying?

The thing we all
need to remember

is that anthrax is not a virus.

It's a bacteria, and that means
you can't catch it.

It can't be transmitted
from person-to-person,

so if you don't have
direct contact with it,

it poses no threat to you.

So calm down.

A-And I've been told
that even if you do have direct contact,

it's still
not necessarily fatal.

Absolutely true.

If anthrax is identified early,
it can be treated.

What makes it tricky
is early anthrax symptoms

look just like the flu.

So unless your doctor knows

that you've actually had
contact with it,

the disease can go undetected
until the drugs we use

to cure it are no
longer effective.

But it's been nearly 20 years

since the last round
of anthrax incidents.

How is it there's still
no cure for this stuff?

Well, ironically,

uh, last year at this time,
my, uh, colleagues and I

were in the process
of developing

some very promising new
late-stage anthrax treatments.

Wait.

"Were"?

Well, our funding, particularly
with regard to anthrax research,

comes from
the federal government.

And they pulled
way back this year.

What can I tell you?

Go write your congressman.

The FBI is in my office.

They've determined
that the anthrax used

in all these recent attacks

comes from our labs.

They want to talk
to the three of you.

What did you do?
Get a second job?

Aren't you afraid of dogs?

Other postal workers
going postal?

Not funny.
It's just my mail

for the last couple of weeks.

I made the post office
hold it for me.

Once I found out the FBI
arrested the anthrax killer,

I figured it was finally safe
to pick it up

and sort through it all.

Won't be needing that anymore.

Bull in his office?

I'm in the middle

of some very important
procrastination.

Hey. Sorry to interrupt.

Why are you so glum,
Mr. Colón?

Haven't you heard?

It's a glorious day in New York.

Spring has sprung,

Easter's barely a month away,

and the anthrax killer
is off the streets.

We can put this whole
dark chapter behind us.

Well, actually, no, we can't.

What does that mean?

You remember, a couple
of years ago, we signed up

to be a part of that program
where private firms offer

their services
to the public defender's office?

No. I got nothing on that.

Must have been trying to get
into somebody's good graces.

What's the difference?
We offered,

and this morning they called.

Natalie Reznick, the accused
anthrax killer, is facing

two counts of capital murder
and a slew of other charges.

Well, she needs a defense team,
and we're one of the few firms

in the city with the expertise
to handle that type of case.

Well, just call 'em back
and tell 'em no.

I have a newborn child
and you have...

Just say that

we really appreciate the offer,
but we are not interested

in representing
a terrorist at this time.

An accused terrorist.

I think you're missing
the point.

The federal defender's office
wasn't asking

when they called me
this morning.

They were telling.

It's our case, Bull.

Happy spring.

I have no idea why I'm here.

Surely you heard the FBI agent

read you the charges before
he took you into custody.

You're being charged with
murdering two people

with a Tier 1 federal
select biological agent

and terrorizing the
city of New York.

Yes, of course, but wh-why would
they think I would do that?

Well, the evidence against you

will be laid out
at your arraignment,

but based
on the charging documents,

the FBI has
a pretty strong case.

How is that possible?

Well, when the funding
for your anthrax research

was cut last year,

you sent out dozens of e-mails.

To journalists, to politicians.

The very people who've been
the targets in these attacks.

Well, y-yes, b-but that's...

that's just a coincidence.

The-the letters that I was
writing were about

how shortsighted and dangerous
it was to cut that funding.

Just because anthrax was
out of the news did not mean

that it was no longer a risk
to national security.

Well, the U.S.
Attorney's Office

suspects that when your warnings
fell on deaf ears,

you orchestrated these attacks
to prove a point.

"Anthrax is still out there.
It's still lethal."

That's absurd. I am a doctor,
I am a scientist.

The work that my team was doing
was about saving lives.

How on earth
would killing people

help us achieve that goal?

If that's all they had,
I'd agree with you.

Are you aware that your office
had been bleached

before the FBI searched it?

Yes.

Bleach is a disinfectant.
I work with pathogens.

But yours was the only office

in the complex
to have been so recently

and thoroughly bleached.

Bleach kills anthrax.

It makes it appear as if
you were destroying evidence.

Your apartment had
been bleached, too.

And investigators found a stash
of the antibiotic ciprofloxacin

and a box of N95 face
masks in your kitchen.

They suspect you used both

when you assembled the
anthrax-laden birthday cards.

I mean, the masks were... I...

I was gonna paint my bathroom.

And I go on a medical mission
every year.

This year, it's Cambodia.

Last year, it was Honduras,

Guadalupe.

Anyway, my doctor gives me cipro
before I go every year.

I meant what I said.

I have no idea why I'm here.

I believe the woman.

I mean, she says she has no idea
what she's doing behind bars.

I believe her.

Okay. Well, that
makes two of you.

Unfortunately, the government
sees it all quite differently.

Yeah, government. You ever heard
of detective myopia?

Detective myopia?

No. Can't say that I have.

It is when law enforcement,

usually because of extreme
public or political pressure,

picks a suspect and then
evaluates all the evidence

with the predisposition
that that suspect is guilty.

And they stop
looking for other suspects,

they stop running down leads

that don't back up
their predetermined theories.

All their work goes into proving
that their suspect,

the person they picked
at random is guilty.

City's in a panic.
FBI needs

to restore calm.

Natalie presented as someone
with access to the bacteria

and an apparent motive,
so they combed through her life

looking for ways
to prove she did it.

Detective myopia.

I think we need to argue
for a change of venue.

Well... I know legal strategy
isn't exactly

my area of expertise,
but I have been going through

the potential jury lists,
and, well, given the panic

and all of the publicity
around this case,

wouldn't we be likely to get

a more impartial jury
somewhere else?

Somewhere that hasn't been
through as much as New York has?

That's not a bad
thought, actually.

You know, the problem is,
it's next to impossible

to get a change of venue
in a federal criminal case.

I'm just worried.

No matter how
I look at the data,

I just don't know how
we're gonna seat a jury

that can look past
their own fears.

That's why we shouldn't try.

In fact, we should do
just the opposite.

We should scare the living
daylights out of 'em.

People are predisposed

to convicting Natalie
because they want to believe

that the danger has passed.

So what we need to do
is convince the jury...

that it hasn't.

Anybody remember the last time

we had a series
of anthrax attacks?

It was right after 9/11,
wasn't it?

Yes, yes. Very good.

And do you remember how long

it took for them
to find the perpetrator?

Uh...

I seem to recall
it was pretty quick.

Indeed it was.

Attorney General John Ashcroft

publicly named former biodefense
researcher Steven Jay Hatfill

as a person of interest
in the attacks.

FBI tapped his phone.

He lost his job,
couldn't get another one.

Almost committed suicide.

Then, in 2008,

everyone suddenly realized

that they were persecuting
the wrong man.

So here's my question to you.

How many of you folks believe
that, of course,

with all the best intentions
in the world,

people whose job it is
to root out the bad guys

sometimes get it wrong?

Now we're getting somewhere.

Means, motive and opportunity...

They must feel they have it,

or they wouldn't
have brought the case.

For those of us
who didn't go to law school,

what does "means" mean again?

It means she could do it;
she had the tools necessary.

In this case, anthrax.
She worked at a place

where anthrax
was readily available.

Yeah, but there's
more to it than that.

Every expert I've spoken with
said the same thing.

Researchers work
with wet anthrax spores.

To make a-a powder that
can be sent in the mail,

you have to use
dry anthrax spores,

and in order to dry them,
you have to use a very specific,

very large piece of equipment
built just for that purpose.

Which, of course,
they have at the lab?

Which, of course, they have
at the lab.

But all of that takes time.

Stealing the anthrax.
Drying the anthrax.

I've skimmed over this
grand jury transcript

three times...
I've yet to see an explanation

for when Natalie
would have been able to do that

- without raising suspicion.
- Obviously,

They are saving their
biggest surprises for trial.

I'll give you another one.

So, the FBI was able

to determine that
all the anthrax letters

were mailed from this mailbox

within a specific
eight-hour period.

Really?

Well, since
I'm the only one here

who hasn't worked
for Homeland or FBI,

can someone tell me
how they do that?

When you drop a letter
into a government mailbox,

it goes into a bin
that's location-specific

and time-coded.

When that bin is carried back
to the general post office

for processing
and your letter is postmarked,

it carries
all that information with it.

Wow. That's really cool.

And more than a little scary.

Back to the pictures.

All right, so, the FBI
examined security footage

from area cameras taken
during the same time frame.

They were able to eliminate
all but three people

who mailed letters
during that period.

Wha...? And how were they able
to do that?

How could they tell
from these... grainy photos

who's mailing anthrax
and who isn't?

Well, I can't be sure,
but my suspicion is,

what they really did
was basically eliminate everyone

who didn't look like Natalie.

There is your detective myopia
that Bull keeps talking about.

And that left them
with three people

who did look like Natalie?

Well, it left them
with three people,

like this person here.

Or this person here.

Or this person here.

People who don't really look
like anyone in particular.

At least
not as far as I can tell.

So what am I gonna tell Bull?

Opening arguments, testimony
start tomorrow morning.

What in the world
am I gonna tell Bull?

Tell him that Danny and I
are putting together dossiers

on everyone
Natalie works with, and...

That our strategy
hasn't changed.

To get the jury and the public
to let go of the idea

that Natalie is the mastermind
behind these attacks,

we have to... come up
with another credible suspect.

And we will.

Now,
Dr. Poulson, as a researcher

in the Medical
Countermeasures Unit

at Hudson University
Laboratories,

you frequently work
shoulder-to-shoulder

with Natalie Reznick,

- don't you?
- Yes, I do.

Now, it's against the lab's
standard operating procedures

for anyone to work alone?

- That's correct, yes.
- And to your knowledge,

Dr. Poulson,

did Dr. Reznick

ever simply disregard this tenet
of standard operating procedure?

Yes, I believe
she may have. Once.

About a week before the attacks.

You're referring to the evening

- of the 11th?
- I don't know what he's talking about.

It was late. We were
the only two people in the lab.

And at around 7:00 p.m.,
I got summoned

to the chancellor's office
for a call with D.C.

Much of the work we do
at our labs

is in partnership
with the Department

of Defense,
so when they say jump,

we jump.

And I told Natalie to...

clean up and that we
would finish up another day.

So I left her unattended.

Which, as the senior researcher,
I shouldn't have done.

But she assured me that she
would just take a few minutes

and then she would leave.

Just to be clear.

Your expectation
was that Dr. Reznick

would take five,
maybe ten minutes

to clean up the lab
and then leave.

Correct?

That was my assumption, yes.

Dr. Poulson...

this is a single frame

from security footage taken
from the night in question.

It shows someone leaving the
laboratory complex at Hudson.

Can you identify that person?

It's Dr. Reznick.

And could you read

the time stamp
on the photo for us, please?

9:26 p.m.

9:26 p.m.

Two and a half hours
after you left the lab, correct?

Yes.

Dr. Poulson,

in your professional opinion,
if Dr. Reznick had been alone

in that lab, not just
for a few minutes to clean up,

but for several hours, would
that have given her enough time

to dry the anthrax spores
into a powder

and sneak them out of the lab?

Objection, Your Honor!
Calls for speculation.

Your Honor,

Dr. Poulson is a microbiologist.

I'm simply asking him
for his professional opinion.

Objection overruled.

I'll allow him to answer.

I believe it would have, yes.

No further questions for now, Your Honor.

Dr. Poulson.

Really appreciate
you being here today.

Now, I know we've heard
a lot of speculation

about what might have happened,
what could have happened,

but you are a scientist.

You deal with the physical
facts of the world.

So let's get back to that.

Do you have any proof

that Dr. Reznick stayed
in the lab alone

any longer than
she told you she would?

Well, based on the time stamp...

Oh, no, no. That
time stamp only proves

what time she left the building,

which was two and a half hours
after you did.

Nowhere does it indicate

what time she left
the lab itself, does it?

No, it doesn't.

Uh-huh.

Now, Dr. Reznick maintains
she left the lab

as promised and spent
the remainder of that time

in her office typing a report
of the day's work.

In fact...

you reviewed that very report
the next morning, didn't you?

It's quite possible.

I often review the reports
from the previous night

the next morning.

I see.

And before the FBI informed you
that Dr. Reznick was a suspect,

did you have any reason
to suspect her of this crime?

No.

I've always believed Natalie
to be trustworthy and...

a passionate scientist.

And I'm still inclined
to believe so.

I mean, hon...

honestly...

I hope the version of events
you just laid out is the truth.

Thank you very much,
Dr. Poulson.

No further questions,
Your Honor.

Redirect?

Regardless of what you
might hope,

Dr. Poulson,

doesn't the fact remain
that a pathogen was stolen

from your lab?

- Yes.
- And based

On your own testimony,
wouldn't you agree

that Dr. Reznick was
the only researcher

who could possibly have had
an opportunity

- to do it?
- Asked and answered,

Your Honor.

Counsel is badgering
the witness.

I'll withdraw the question, Your Honor.

How's the view
from where you're sitting?

The only good news is,

it can't get any worse.

I'm awake.
It's okay.

Partying all
night with Astrid again, huh?

Yeah.

I was sitting in the living room
at 3:00 in the morning,

little Astrid up on my shoulder.

I was trying
to get a burp out of her.

And I flip on the news,
and we're everywhere.

- Mm-hmm.
- Every channel.

And if it is our intention
to convince the jury

that the real anthrax killer
is still out there,

well, the national media
has not picked up on it.

Which means...

we're failing.

Well, you don't know that.

Our target's the jury,
not cable news.

But the world of cable news
is the world

these jurors go home to
every night.

And if the CNNs and the Foxes
and the CNBCs aren't buying

our version of events,
then neither

are the jurors' families
or neighbors.

And we all know they're not
supposed to talk about the case

or watch the news about it...
but they do.

I'm sorry, Bull, but I think
you're being a little premature.

The prosecution is still
presenting their case,

and we haven't even
gotten our turn.

I know. But we can't
wait until then.

We have to go
on the offensive now.

We got to use every objection,
every cross to hammer home

how dangerous it will be
if the jury gets this one wrong.

The killer is still out there.

My wife, my-my wife Katie,

she didn't aspire
to a political life.

I mean, heck,
when I met her in grad school,

she didn't even read the paper.

But then we fell in love,
and the next thing you know,

I'm running for office and then
we're out there together

on the campaign trail.

Oh, she was a natural.

I mean, she loved people.

And people sensed it
and they loved her right back.

You see, I take enormous pride
in being a congressman.

But the thought that my job,

that my commitment
to public service

somehow contributed
to her d-death...

It's all right,
Congressman Connors.

No further questions.

Uh, Bull, it's not
looking good here.

This jury really feels
for the congressman.

Of course they do. So do I.

But that doesn't mean his pain
is Natalie's fault.

Congressman Connors.

I'd just like to say
how profoundly sorry I am

for your loss.

Thank you.

Now, much has been
made of the fact

that you were a part
of a long list of legislators

Dr. Reznick reached out to
in the wake

of a funding cut
to her research program.

Now, do you recall
Dr. Reznick's

message to you to be
threatening in any way?

Honestly, I don't.

You see, my staff filters my
e-mails, so I only learned about

that message in the, in the
aftermath of my wife's passing.

But, no, it did not appear
to be threatening.

But I imagine your office
must receive

threatening e-mails
from time to time?

Yes, unfortunately,
in my line of work,

you have to make
tough choices sometimes,

choices that anger people,

and occasionally
those people do lash out.

How many threats would you
estimate that you've received

in the seven years
that you've been in Congress?

Uh, like I said, my staff
filters my communications,

so there's really
no way for me to know.

Well, my office inquired.

And according to your staff,
it's 102.

That's how many unique threats

your office has received
in the past seven years.

19 of those were death threats.

So let me ask you,

in the wake of these attacks,
to the best of your knowledge,

did the FBI investigate
those 19 people

who previously threatened
to take your life?

They may have.

Honestly, I don't know.

You don't know.

Wow. That's kind of unsettling.

I mean, did the FBI
even ask you about

anyone who possibly could have
had a vendetta against you

during that time period?

I don't know.

Well, then I truly am sorry
for you, Congressman Connors.

Not only for your tragic
loss, but also because,

apparently, law enforcement
seems more interested

in scapegoating Natalie Reznick
than it does

in making sure your wife's
real killer is off the streets.

Objection. Counsel
is testifying.

Sustained.

The jury will disregard
the defense's last statement.

Ask a question, Mr. Colón.

That's all right, Your Honor.

I have no further questions

- at this time.
- I'm sure you can't see it yet,

But it finally feels
like we're making progress.

The government will
call its next witness, please.

The government rests
its case, Your Honor.

Then the defense will call
its first witness, please.

My parents came to this country
before I was born.

They were scientists
in the Soviet Union,

but they refused to toe
the party line,

so their lives were in danger.

They fled
and they found sanctuary here,

in America.

And until the day they died,

they never ceased
being grateful for that.

And they raised me
to be grateful, too.

I decided when I was

a very young girl
that, when I grew up,

I-I would help people somehow,

protect people somehow.

So, is that how you ended
up researching cures

for deadly biological weapons?

Uh, well, it was...

It was part of it, sure.

A love of science.

I don't know.

It-it-it gives me
a sense of satisfaction,

like I'm-I'm pulling
my own weight,

I'm doing my share.

I am showing my gratitude.

So the idea that you would hurt

or kill fellow Americans
for your own personal gain...

Is absurd.

To do the work that I do,

you have...
You have to become a doctor.

I'm-I'm a doctor.

I took an oath to save lives.

Why would I knowingly set out
to hurt anyone?

Kill anyone?

Thank you, Dr. Reznick.

No further questions,
Your Honor.

They look engaged to me,
receptive.

Open body language.

A couple jurors
are starting to lean in.

Does that line up
with what you're seeing?

Sure does.

They're starting
to find Natalie credible,

and a few of them
are now firmly on her side.

So,

Dr. Reznick,

the pleasure you take
from your work

is fundamentally altruistic,
right?

I mean, you want to
pull your own weight.

You want to do your share.

And, most of all,
you want to help people, huh?

Protect people.

This is what you just testified
to, correct?

Yes.

And you would never want
to hurt anyone.

You certainly wouldn't want
to see anyone die.

I mean, the work

you do,

your very reason for being,

is all about saving lives.

Is that correct?

That is what I said, yes.

Interesting.

Because I have a video

of an academic conference
you participated in,

which would seem

to suggest otherwise.

Uh...
Objection.

Your Honor, this is the first

the defense has heard
of any video.

- The AUSA knows...
- Your Honor, a concerned citizen

- Sent this video to our office...
- he has a duty to disclose

- Any and all...
- only just yesterday.

Enough! Both of you.

Mr. Reynolds,

I'm gonna take you at
your word and allow this.

Mr. Colón, I will give you
ample time to prepare

should you choose to redirect.

Let's proceed.

Is that you
up there, Dr. Reznick,

on the stage, in the video?

It is. Yes.

Do you recall
when this video was taken?

Um, I-I believe

it was an ethics panel
at a microbiology conference

about... ten years ago.

I was still a postgrad.

I have a hypothetical question
for you, Dr. Reznick.

Okay.

If an unknown deadly
virus or bacteria

were to infect an
isolated group of people,

what, in your opinion,

is the best course of action?

Um, well, uh,

if there was a chance to contain
the outbreak within that group,

I'd say that the only choice

is to quarantine the infected...

Nobody in, nobody out...

And then watch the, uh,
progression of the disease.

Even if the disease were deadly?

Well, if you don't know

what the pathogen is,

treating the symptoms
may be futile.

You're going to have
to let in medical workers,

and then, at some point,
you're going

to have to let them back out,

and they very well may carry

whatever it is
to the general population.

So, yeah,

harsh as it sounds,

quarantine.

Because, unfortunately,

sometimes five have to die
to save 5,000.

"Sometimes five have to die
to save 5,000."

Is that why you sent the anthrax
through the mail, Dr. Reznick?

Because you thought it
would be okay to kill two

if it meant recovering the funds

that you needed
in order to find a cure?

Objection.

Facts not in evidence.

Speculation.

Badgering.

Should I go on?

Of course not.

That is part
of a larger conversation.

You lifted that out of context.

- Dr. Reznick.
- And organically contracting

A disease
is fundamentally different

- than intentionally infecting someone.
- Dr. Reznick.

Dr. Reznick.

Your attorney was making
an objection on your behalf.

In the future, when an attorney

makes an objection,

please refrain from answering
until I've rendered my decision

on the objection.

I will let
the witness's statement

remain in the record.

Let's take a ten-minute
break and allow everyone

- to cool down. The witness will remain...
- How's this playing where you are?

Not terribly well.

I'm afraid
we lost all our greens, Bull.

We will continue her
testimony at that time.

So, how was dinner?

Not great.

I wasn't hungry.
I'd been eating

my small intestine
all afternoon.

I promise you,

it was as difficult
to listen to over here

as I'm sure it was
for you to witness in person.

The problem is, was,

and continues to be
we've presented the jury

with no real alternatives
to our client.

We keep insisting
it must be someone else, but...

we never say who.

Yeah.

Bull's hitting the nail
on the head, Marissa.

Every time I feel like
we're making progress,

every time I feel a hint
of traction with this jury,

it all slips away.

That's because they have no one
else to consider but Natalie.

I hear you. And all
I can tell you is that...

Danny, Chunk, and Taylor...

Who is standing
right next to me...

They're all beating the bushes,

trying to find someone who could
have plausibly pulled this off.

Dr. Bull, did
you get a chance

to go through those dossiers
I prepared for you?

There's material there on
almost 50 lab employees,

all of whom have
access to anthrax.

I'm getting through them
as fast as I can, Taylor.

But it's not as if anyone
flagged one of the employees

and said, "Here's
a plausible suspect."

Come on, Bull.
We are all pulling

on the same end
of the rope here.

What?

The hell was that?

What's going on over there?

Uh...

is it...
safe out here?

Absolutely.

My name is, uh, Jason Bull.

This is my place of business.

I have two employees inside.

Do you have any sense of when
they'll be able to come out?

They will be able to come out
at some point, right?

It's gonna be quite a while.

You might want
to give them a call.

How you guys feeling?

At the moment?
Absolutely fine.

A little hungry.

He asked.

We can't eat anything
from the kitchen.

Can't eat anything until
they give us the all clear

and we can get out of here.

We are gonna be fine. They've
loaded us up with antibiotics.

I think it's primarily

about waiting for lab results
at this point.

Marissa, Taylor, I'm so sorry
you're going through this.

They give you

any ETA on these tests?

Uh, they've estimated
another three hours or so.

Taylor, do you need us
to swing by your place

and pick up your son?

Nope. He's at his dad's.

Thank goodness.

Hey, uh, guys, there's nothing
for you to do here.

Why don't you just head home?

Bull, I will text you as soon
as they tell us anything.

As soon as they let us out
of here.

Are you sure? I mean,

I'm happy to stick around.

We're good.

We've got each other.

Okay.

Then I am going to go home,

kiss my baby,

and read some dossiers.

Would you think
I was a terrible person

if I told you that,

as horrible as this must be
for Marissa and Taylor,

there's potentially
a big upside to it?

Oh, thank God.

I thought I was the only one
whose mind worked that way.

Natalie's in jail.

So she couldn't have done it.

If the FBI and the CDC confirm

that the handwriting is the same
on the letter we got at TAC

as on the envelopes
that went out

to the congressman
and the newscaster...

And that the construction
of the gizmo

that makes sure the anthrax
makes contact with the person

is similar...

I think our client
is free and clear.

I'll make sure to keep
all my digits crossed.

Hello?

Marissa.

Tell me what's going on.

On your way home?

Uh, that's great.

Great to hear.

Really?

They certain of that?
Powdered sugar?

Yeah, that is funny.

If Taylor had only licked
her fingers,

she wouldn't have been hungry
anymore.

Well, the two of you
get something to eat,

get some sleep,
and I'll see you in the morning.

Night.

You have no idea how happy I am

to be standing here,
talking to you.

You have no idea
how happy I am to be talked to.

Mm.

Just a copycat.

Copycat with powdered sugar
trying to intimidate us.

Somebody who'd watched the news
and convinced themselves

that Natalie is a murderer

and that we're the bad guys
just doing whatever we can

- to help her evade the law.
- Well,

I went through the rest of the
dossiers early this morning,

and I found one that ticked
a lot of boxes for me.

Really?

What if I told you that one
of the employees at Hudson

served as a medic
during the first Gulf War?

Okay. And that's meaningful
because...?

Because it means
they have firsthand knowledge

of the devastation biological
and chemical weapons cause.

No offense, but that
hardly seems like enough

to get a jury
to change its mind.

What if I told you this person
was stationed in territory

where Saddam Hussein was waging
chemical and biological warfare

against a large swath
of civilians?

Still kind of feels like we're
making some big leaps here,

don't you think?

I don't know.

Why does someone dedicate their
life to finding an antidote

to something like anthrax?

We know why Natalie did it.

She felt... a sense of
obligation to her country.

So, what if this person did it

because they keenly understood

that biological weapons were an
imminent threat to the homeland?

So, when Congress cut
their funding for the research,

they took matters
into their own hands

and decided the one

or two deaths necessary to seize
the public's imagination

were a fair trade if it helped
prevent a greater harm.

So, you're saying the FBI
had the right motive...

Just pegged the wrong person.

Who is this person?

Roger Simpkins?

Uh, Natalie's boss?

The man who oversees
the entire program?

His position means he can come
and go between labs by himself

without raising suspicion,

which means he has access

to anthrax.

Not to mention the know-how

and the equipment
to dry the spores with.

Not only did
Dr. Simpkins have the motive,

the means, and the opportunity
to commit this crime...

He was also
in the perfect position

to frame Natalie Reznick.

Natalie had
to get her boss's okay

before she wrote to that list

of legislators and journalists
in the wake of the budget cuts.

Dr. Simpkins

could easily have pulled
Congressman Connors'

and Allison Rojas' names
from that list in an effort

to make Natalie look guilty.

I'm sorry,

but none of this
sounds terribly convincing.

In fact, it sounds desperate,

like you know
you're about to lose

and you're throwing spaghetti
on the wall,

hoping something will stick.

Look, I came to this meeting

in good faith.

But I got to tell you,

I believe
Natalie Reznick is guilty,

and nothing
I've heard here today

even remotely begins
to change my mind.

Well, perhaps we should
have skipped the warm-up then.

Danny, the pièce de résistance,
if you will.

You recognize these images,
Mr. Reynolds?

Of course.

Those are
from the security footage

the FBI lifted near the mailbox
where the letters were sent.

You were never able
to identify Natalie

in any of these photos,
were you?

Come on.
Look at the time of year.

Look how everyone is dressed.

Nevertheless, we do believe
one of them is Natalie.

Well, in the same way
you set out to prove

one of them is Natalie,

we set out to prove
one of them is Dr. Simpkins.

We widened the surveillance area

and accessed all
of the security cameras

within a half-mile
radius of the mailbox.

Now,
the FBI determined that there was

an eight-hour window during
which the letters were mailed.

So, using a photograph
of Dr. Simpkins' face,

our office created an algorithm

to scan all eight hours
of the footage

from every single camera.

This is what we found.

Recorded by an ATM
about four blocks away

from the mailbox.

As you can see,
that's Roger Simpkins.

And you'll notice his hat

perfectly matches this hat.

In this photo.

Where a person
is clearly mailing letters.

Letters which I would bet
contain anthrax.

Nice work.

Well, I suppose the four of us

should take a walk
down to the judge's chambers,

see if we can get an audience.

If this isn't probable cause
for a search warrant,

I don't know what is.

Look out there.

You see a single face mask?

Nope.

Just people walking their dogs,

strolling their kids.

Well, it's like
we told the judge...

The FBI searched
Dr. Simpkins' apartment,

only to discover it,
too, had been bleached.

Luckily, when they opened up
the HVAC ducts,

they found anthrax spores
behind a vent in the kitchen.

I still have a hard time
believing it.

We talked about it all the time.

He kept saying
how he wanted to help people,

protect people.

Oh, I'm sure he thought
he was doing just that.

Doing it for the greater good.

You know, I guess that's why
I like my work so much.

Bacteria may be challenging,

but they're a whole hell
of a lot easier to understand

than people.

Captioning sponsored by CBS

Captioned by Media Access
Group at WGBH access.wgbh.org