Look down 1
Quality of Information Check Template
Name: __Michael Johnson_________
Case Study: “The Atlanta Olympics Bombing” (Week 12)
Instructions: List three examples of information or evidence that support the argument that Richard Jewell is responsible for the bombing at the Atlanta Olympics and three examples of information or evidence that do not clearly support the argument that Richard Jewell is responsible. For each piece of information or evidence, assign a value of High, Medium, or Low about the quality of that information. Provide your rationale.
| Evidence/Information that Supports | Quality of Informa-tion (High, Med, Low) | Comments |
| 1. A college president suggested to the FBI that Jewell may have planted the bomb in an effort to position himself as a hero in order to compensate for his failures as a police officer. This theory was supported by two similar incidents in which the suspects would eventually be found guilty. One of them even involved a security guard in the 1984 Olympics held in Los Angeles. | Medium | The call by the college professor was purely speculative, but led to the discovery of a bevy of other inculpatory information including the two similar incidents. |
| 2. The FBI’s profiling unit: determined that Jewell fit the profile of a person who would commit a crime of this nature and that Jewell’s open ambition to become a police officer after the Olympic games was suspicious and inappropriate in the wake of such a tragedy and that this drive to become a police officer could be a motive for planting the explosives. | Medium | This evidence lacks hard facts and relies strictly on the expert judgment of the FBI, but is relatable and credible (on a human level) nonetheless. |
| 3. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (newspaper) reported that Jewell had a bag similar to the one used to execute the bombing and that Jewell had received bomb training. | Low | If Jewell had the same kind of bag that was used in the bombing, it should not be considered as important because it was commonly owned by military personnel. His bomb training does suggest that he may have had the ability to commit the bombing, but there must be a great many ex-military who have had similar training. |
| Evidence/Information that Does Not Support | Quality of Informa-tion (High, Med, Low) | Comments |
| 1.Jewell was considered to be a witness and not a suspect after his July 27th & 28th interviews with various law enforcement agencies. | Medium | This evidence represents a pure, unbiased impression of Jewell after several interviews with various levels of law enforcement prior to the call placed by the college president. We are relying on these opinions in the absence of facts. |
| 2. Jewell’s attorney stated that it would have been physically impossible for Jewell to have called in the bomb threat given that it occurred only one minute after Jewell had spoken with a law enforcement official. Investigators estimate that it would take a person 4 minutes and 45 seconds to cover the ground that Jewell would have needed to cover to have placed the call from the location where it had been placed. | Medium | This evidence supplied by Jewell’s attorney is credible because it works within the parameters of what we may believe are the FBI’s objective time estimates. An attorney’s opinion must always be taken with a grain of salt. |
| 3. Jewell passed an FBI polygraph in which he denied involvement in the bombing. | Medium | This represents Jewell’s final triumph at the end of the crucible that was the fickle opinioneering of the various authoritative entities (law enforcement and media) who held his fate in their hands. Polygraphs are thought to be 70-90% accurate and are therefore not a definitive source of truth. |
Page 3 of 3
