April 30th, 2021 State of Maryland v. Daniel Sirotkin - CC Case No.: 124841C The Honorable Richard Jordan: In the comings weeks I will be filing a Motion for Modification of Sentence, but I am writing at this time to provide a little background for this request. Over the past year and change, my father and I have been covering the emergence of the COVID-19 Pandemic, and became the first research team to publish a peer-reviewed paper examining the possibility of a laboratory- engineered origin of SARS-CoV-2. Then in recent days, I learned that a member of the British House of Lords and another foreign national associated with Harvard’s Broad Institute engaged in a conspiracy to bribe a third foreign national to remove my father and I from another paper relating to a laboratory origin which we helped co-author, while a fourth foreign national, this one Russian, baselessly accused us of plagiarism. Perhaps this all seems a bit jarring, let me backtrack a little bit. In January 2020, I was fired from my job at Café Mozart in downtown DC when word of my charges reached the owner. At least this time the manager firing me was incredibly apologetic, since the manager - who’d become a friend during my nine months of employment - had hired me under the impression that he was in fact in charge. However, my charges had once again prevented me from holding a steady job, despite the fact that not only was I a waiter - at the time of my termination I was working on rewriting the menus, providing copy for social media outreach, and drafting advertising that would be sent to local tourist groups since I had the idea of branding Café Mozart as “DC’s oldest woman-owned restaurant!” which we had reason to believe it was. This happened after the pandemic was starting to make the news, something my father and I had been following a bit given his background and our shared interest in that kind of thing. At this point the rest of the story becomes best-told by the actual documents involved which are enclosed, however below is a shortly popularized summary of the work my father and I have done attempting to warn people about the dangers of what we were relatively sure was an engineered virus since January 2020. Since our peer-reviewed publication in August 2020, we have had very unusual and unsettling contacts – detailed within the materials provided - with a former Secretary of the Navy, editors of the New York Times and Washington Post, multiple writers with prominent national magazines, scientists with ties to DARPA and John’s Hopkins Applied Research Labs, and the Russian owner of a Canadian biotechnology firm who slandered my father directly, baselessly, and unapologetically with a groundless accusation of plagiarism. However, everything seems to lead to the event which I mentioned at the start, when I was informed by a co-author of a paper my father and I had worked on and had our names on, that Matt Ridley, a member of the British House of Lords, as well as Alina Chan, another foreign national presenting herself as a scientist with ties to Harvard and MIT’s Broad Institute had attempted to bribe them to remove my father and I from that paper. I was told this foreign national “payed some consequences” for working with me and my father and lost an offer of “sponsorship” for not removing us – meaning that a member of the House of Lords as well as a foreign national representing the interest of the billionaire funders behind the Broad Institute, feel like they can do this sort of thing to me and my family without impunity, apparently due in part because of my criminal record. As I have been informed on several occasions that the above party in question has been using my criminal record as a reason not to work with me and my father, and as justification to steal our intellectual property from us. This slander has resulted in a senior official attached to our government’s response into the pandemic to explain to me in late April 2021 that I would never have a public role in any of this because, “…the background issue give [sic] people the creeps. It is not avoidable.” Something New York Magazine already blatantly took to heart with the help of Nicholson Baker, who interviewed my father and me extensively, before writing his article which directly stole many of our original ideas and made no mention of us or our peer-reviewed work whatsoever. The enclosed files demonstrate my attempts to file formal ethical complaints with the relevant institutions, however so far only the House of Lords has replied to let me know that bribing scientists to remove other scientists from papers is apparently outside of their jurisdiction. However, after contacting them on April 22nd, 2021 with my complaint, on April 24th 2021, a British chemicals weapons expert and former commander of UK and NATO CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological Nuclear) forces, Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, published the enclosed letter in the Telegraph admitting that a laboratory origin should still be very much on the table, and he had “completely missed a pathogen such as Covid as a potential catastrophe-maker.” I feel it necessary to bring all of this to the attention of the Court because it is obvious to me there is a coordinated conspiratorial disinformation campaign being organized against the interests of the United States Constitution, which I once took an oath to preserve and protect, that poses a clear and present danger to American lives. And because I am still on probation, I am afraid of inadvertently incriminating myself with law-enforcement authorities, especially given how restrictive some of the extra-judicial restrictions on me are – so I am hoping the Court can ensure that these materials all reach all the relevant law-enforcement and counterintelligence authorities. Thank you again for your time and consideration, and I hope to reach out again in the coming weeks with an appeal to have my probation dropped to expedite my pursuit of a new life, because as it has become clear not only is there no professional path forward for me to ever build a career in the land of my birth. Since in the course of using my experience and abilities to preserve American lives, I feel like I have placed myself and my family in danger as well, and would like help bringing the appropriate attention to these circumstances, and feel like the Court may appreciate a little time to review the relevant circumstances before I file my appeal, which will include the sort of information that would typically be enclosed in this sort of communication. Respectfully, Dan Sirotkin Dr. Karl Sirotkin is a 40-year PhD in Microbiology and the designer of dbSNP, with nearly 20 years of molecular wet-work experience. He previously taught molecular virology at the University of Tennessee, and worked within the Theoretical Biology Division of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. At the time of his retirement from government service, Dr. Sirotkin had more years working for GenBank than any other staff member - with his 28 years of service on the world's premiere DNA sequencing database making him one of the most experienced scientists on the planet when it comes to managing and analyzing genomic sequences. Dan was a freshman wrestling at Harvard on 9/11, winner of a Stokes Scholarship from Ft. Meade, where he would intern every summer using his Arabic and Government studies. After transitioning to lacrosse after two years and then graduating, he would work at Ft. Meade for about a year before leaving to write Tremble the Devil and coach high school sports back at his alma matter. His coaching career led him to Kyle Snyder, who just made his fifth consecutive World or Olympic wrestling team, who Dan coached year-round his sophomore and junior years of high school before spearheading the effort to get him to the Olympic Training Center for his senior year. Kyle would then go on to first become the youngest World Champion in American wrestling history, and then America’s youngest Olympic Champion the next year. Dan would eventually spend 20 months as his prison's special education tutor during his 1,300 days of incarceration, and become certified in scrubbing prison toilets. January 31, 2020 - Logistical and Technical Analysis of the Wuhan Strain of Coronavirus. 1. Observe in their original report, first captured by the WayBack Machine on Feb. 1 2020, that the ability to manufacture DNA viruses was first demonstrated at Stony Brook in 2002 with polio. They go on to note that this technology was refined for use with RNA viruses as well, and by 2015 the University of North Carolina had successfully created a "chimeric, SARS-like virus" by altering the spike-proteins of various Chinese bat coronaviruses, engineered for more efficient cell-entry. 2. Document Chinese's incredibly high relative rate of all industrial accidents, the fact that SARS had leaked from Chinese labs four times in recent years, and note concerns published in Nature about Chinese BSL labs specifically - all making it self-evident that leaks are incredibly common and a very plausible source of the pandemic. 3. Single-out the WIV due to their research into papers like Human-animal interactions and bat coronavirus spillover potential among rural residents in Southern China as well as ongoing drug-testing meant to treat SARS-live viruses on lab animals in Wuhan. Work carried out around folks like the notorious Dr. Zhengli Shi, who at UNC helped bio-engineer highly-virulent coronaviruses derived from bats in the experiments described above, and another UNC-attached scientist who was the first to isolate a bat-borne virus targeting the ACE2 receptor from bats back in China. 4. Warn that airport temperature checks are entirely useless, and that the pandemic would quickly spread across the entire planet if they were treated as meaningful: The coronavirus 2019-nCoV appears to be transmissible even before its host shows any symptoms at all, making temperature-scanning at airports ineffective since hosts appear to be contagious for about a week before any symptoms emerge. This is in stark contrast with SARS, whose hosts weren’t contagious until they were symptomatic, allowing for its relatively quick containment. 5. Rule-out recombination as a possible source, and decide that since the novel coronavirus appears to be built from bits and pieces from across the coronavirus family-tree, and also since at least two scientists who intimate knowledge of engineering SARS-like spike-proteins were involved with UNC’s research and were now back at the WIV, and finally given that SARS-CoV- 2’s spike-protein was so unique and had already been identified as possibly having so many odd features – that bio-engineering was the only parsimonious conclusion. Valentine’s Day, 2020 6. Dan is tipped off about the existence of a spicy pre-print, nearly a year later claimed to have been “discovered” by the Associated Press despite Zero Hedge’s responsible journalistic attribution, and updates the site: “In summary, somebody was entangled with the evolution of 2019-nCoV coronavirus. In addition to origins of natural recombination and intermediate host, the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.” Since William Broad of the New York Times had contacted him earlier in February, Dan assumes the story is about to go big time, however after making that initial contact stating “I’d love to chat about accidental release of 2019-nCoV” Mr. Broad has never emailed back. February 19, 2020 7. On the day it is published in the Lancet, Dan immediately condemns the letter as an obvious act of CCP disinformation organized by “Peter Daszak, who had been publishing papers on coronaviruses alongside the primary Chinese person of interest, Zhengli Shi, for years. Perhaps most notably, Daszak is listed as a co-author in the paper first documenting the isolation of a coronavirus from a bat that targets the ACE2 receptor – just like COVID-19 – which was done in Wuhan’s virology lab supervised by Zhengli Shi, and led by a second suspect Chinese researcher who you’ll meet below. If nothing else, Daszak holds an enormous conflict-of-interest, and is perhaps acting as an unwitting agent of the Chinese government. Daszak’s statement in The Lancet is meant to be a smokescreen for the wanton hubris and greed that have fueled the gain-of-function research detailed below: coronaviruses have been seen as a viable vector for an HIV vaccine for years – a project with hundreds of millions of dollars dangling over it. “Such a vaccine is just one possible gain-of-function pursuit, whether or not it was the exact target of the Wuhan lab’s gain-of-function research – the reality is millions of dollars of funding from multiple world governments have poured into this research, funding that’s dangled over these scientists as they’ve chased it like Icarus, this time not just risking their own lives – but hundreds of millions of others as well.” March 19, 2020 8. Two days after the publication of the Proximal Origins paper which largely closed the public discussion after a laboratory origin, Dan writes a colorfully titled response which points out that Nature Magazine has an established history on censorship on behalf of the CCP, and that the corporate mainstream media in America was already mindlessly regurgitating whatever they were told by the people directly involved with this research without the slightest bit of critical analysis. And notes among other things that there was no evidence at all of the typical trial-and- error that precedes a zoonosis into humans, and that the novel coronavirus immediately had incredibly high affinity for human ACE2, which may well be explained by serial passage. 9. Dan’s response goes on to point out that serial passage could also easily account for SARS- CoV-2’s incredible affinity for human ACE2 receptors, since this process would leave a genome that appears “natural” and not purposeful as well since it wouldn’t leave a genomic smoking gun and would simply appear to be the result of “natural” selection. However, the addition of artificial generations produced by this process of passing through ferrets in the lab would create a lot of genetic distance from any possible relatives – precisely what is seen in COVID-19: it forms its own clade and appears very distant from all other bat coronaviruses. So this is lazy research, they’re either unaware of the Bird Flu study or are willfully ignoring it. The article goes on to explain how serial passage explains many other elements the article bizarrely claims couldn’t possibly be the result of laboratory manipulation, as if serial passage does not even exist at all and serial passage gain-of-function work on influenza viruses wasn’t the reason why the moratorium on gain-of-function research happened in the first place. March 23, 2020 10. Failing to get any kind of traction with American peer reviewed journals or any publication at all besides Zero Hedge, Dan writes up a popularized explanation of the science that uses The Expanse to draw parallels to the ongoing pandemic: Scientists with questionable motivations and morals, a technology that pushes the limits of human understanding, and the geopolitical fallout that can happen when scientists, especially those who preen and profiteer between the edge of scientific research and arms dealing, are given free rein to play God. This article also draws direct parallels to the mysterious 1977 leak of H1N1, which the father-and-son team would later go on to definitively link to gain-of-function research within the peer reviewed literature, after first having a very strange encounter with several researchers with close ties to DARPA, including a retired Secretary of the Navy. April 22, 2020 11. After a burst of inspiration and a bunch of help from a Twitter contact who has a hard time not biking into canals, Dan and Karl begin another round of queries – this time to European peer-reviewed scientific journals. In stark contrast to every single American science or popular publication, they get several bites, and go on to publish the first peer reviewed examination of a laboratory engineered origin in BioEssays: Might SARS-CoV-2 Have Arisen via Serial Passage through an Animal Host or Cell Culture? However despite being contacted back in February 2020 by William J. Broad with the New York Times, talking with Josh Rogin of the Washington Post in September 2020, Drew Griffin with CNN in October 2020 for his story about a laboratory origin, and speaking extensively with Nicholson Baker before he wrote a New York Magazine in November 2020 that would shamelessly plagiarize the father-son team – none of the reporting from any of these institutions nor any other mainstream publication in America covering the COVID-19 Pandemic has referenced the work and analysis of Dr. Karl Sirotkin and his son, Dan Sirotkin.