DC DC - Chandra Levy, 24, Washington DC, 1 May 2001 *found deceased in 2002*

[snowblossom2]

Hmmm, my only shock is the government admitting a mistake was made with the arrest of the wrong person while Condit is still alive.

Amazing how "unforeseen developments" came to light when it was known that Condit's testimony on the stand did not match his words to the police. His refusal to answer questions was very telling to me and pointed to guilty at the time.

What is going to happen now with the "unforeseen developments"?

Can you elaborate on the discrepancies?

 

[Inthedetails]

"Court filings related to the retrial suggested that Guandique’s defense team had plans to float Condit’s name again as a suspect, the Washington Post reported."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...andra-levy-convicted-killer-article-1.2730026

Well, the defense team can say that Condit either did it or might have done it (enough to raise reasonable doubt for the defendant), but I'm interested in knowing if the prosecution will be now looking at Condit again.

So sorry Chandra's family has to go through this ordeal.

 

[Satchie]

Washington Post states the truthfulness of the testimony by the jailhouse witness has been cast into doubt.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...hp_hp-more-top-stories_no-name:homepage/story

 

[i.b.nora]

Washington Post states the truthfulness of the testimony by the jailhouse witness has been cast into doubt.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...hp_hp-more-top-stories_no-name:homepage/story

Thats pretty brave of that woman. Good for her!

 

[steelman]

I find it hard to believe that any judge would drop the charges because of something a jailhouse snitch had to say...........there's got to be something pretty compelling going on here. This almost has to be DNA based or something along those lines, something that pretty much erases any doubt of Guandique's
involvement.

 

[Quiet Time]

I agree it wouldn't seem to be in character. However we've seen a lot of men make inconvenient women disappear since that time, was murder in character for those men? These are almost always a crime of passion, not that of the character of a murderer.
But the upcoming re-trial of Guandique is presenting the possibility of accidental death due to bondage sex, the point being that with only circumstantial evidence the circumstances point to Chandra being bound up and dead and the mistress of a man who practiced bondage sex.

Very interesting! imo

 

[marble]

I find it hard to believe that any judge would drop the charges because of something a jailhouse snitch had to say...........there's got to be something pretty compelling going on here. This almost has to be DNA based or something along those lines, something that pretty much erases any doubt of Guandique's
involvement.

Gotta agree with this. Innocent people languish in jail for *years* after much stronger evidence absolving them of crimes is has been presented. I have a hard time believing the justice system would admit something is amiss in a case involving a non-legal resident who has been convicted of other attacks on women given their poor track record for exonerating completely innocent incarcerated U.S. citizens. Definitely something more compelling than a snitch taking back a statement since that often happens in those cases.

 

[JnRyan]

I just came back to this case after being away from it since the conviction. Now I'm wondering if the focus comes back to Condit? (Might have been mentioned earlier here, but I just read the latest on this yesterday and starting looking at it again today.)

 

[rd_jfc]

I find it hard to believe that any judge would drop the charges because of something a jailhouse snitch had to say...........there's got to be something pretty compelling going on here. This almost has to be DNA based or something along those lines, something that pretty much erases any doubt of Guandique's
involvement.

Nope, there was even DNA found on Chandra's clothes that wasn't Guandique's and that didn't clear him. That was the only evidence there was.

I think it's obvious that this was rigged up by Morales and the DC prosecutors because the Public put Morales, the DC prosecutors, and Condit on notice they would be aggessively questioning all of them to find out the truth of what these people did.

 

[LinasK]

Nope, there was even DNA found on Chandra's clothes that wasn't Guandique's and that didn't clear him. That was the only evidence there was.

I think it's obvious that this was rigged up by Morales and the DC prosecutors because the Public put Morales, the DC prosecutors, and Condit on notice they would be aggessively questioning all of them to find out the truth of what these people did.

Are you suggesting Congressman Condit had that much influence to frame him??? Condit lost his position. I think he has an ice cream shop in Arizona now...

 

[rd_jfc]

He lost that many years ago.

No, not for Condit as an individual with influence, but for DC as a power structure that doesn't want a murder investigation pursued into the halls of Congress.

There is no alibi or any answers from Condit and I don't expect any, but I'm talking about finding out the answers to questions about Chandra's life such as I pose in Murder on a Horse Trail.

If the answers lead away from Condit, so be it. But you have to ask questions to get answers.

The scapegoating of Guandique starting with denying he passed a lie detector test in 2001 that his cellmate accuser failed was done by DC police and prosecutors with Washington Post reporter brainwashing the public with shall we say biased information. None of what was in the indictment whcih was based on Washington Post reporting made it into the trial.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I definitely thought it was Condit from the beginning -- and have never changed my mind.

That's not very open minded. :tongue:

 

[Grainne Dhu]

Jul 28 2016, 3:29 pm ET

Prosecutors Drop Murder Charge Against Man Accused of Killing Chandra Levy

by Pete Williams

Federal prosecutors moved Thursday to drop the case against Ingmar Guandique, the man accused of murdering federal government intern Chandra Levy in 2001.

"In the interests of justice and based on recent unforeseen developments that were investigated over the past week, the Office moved to dismiss the case charging Ingmar Guandique with the May 2001 murder of Chandra Levy. The Office has concluded that it can no longer prove the murder case against Mr. Guandique beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the Office will not proceed with the retrial of Mr. Guandique," said a statement from the U.S. Attorney's office in Washington, D.C.

Guandique was tried and convicted of Levy's murder in 2010 and sentenced to 60 years in prison. He was granted a new trial last year after his lawyers said a key witness lied to the jury. Guandique has been in prison for attacks on other women...

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...inst-man-accused-killing-chandra-levy-n618991

Interesting.

I remember early on I had doubts about Guandique after I read a detailed history of his crimes. What made me wonder was that he had been accused in an incident where he broke and entered into a woman's apartment one week after Chandra Levy disappeared. In that case, the woman was middle aged and managed to scare him off by screaming, slapping and kicking at him. Made me wonder if he really was guilty of Chandra Levy's murder because being scared off by a woman screaming and flailing at him didn't exactly sound like a really dangerous predator.

I still have doubts that it was Condit, who just never seemed like a good suspect to me. For one thing, it was clear that under pressure, he did really stupid stuff.

I could easily be wrong but right now, I'm thinking the perp is probably someone who flew under the radar and may never have been a suspect at all.

 

[dotr]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...ccd898-55a9-11e6-bbf5-957ad17b4385_story.html

Lawyers on both sides had learned about recent secretly recorded conversations with the man who was to have been the key witness against Ingmar Guandique, Levy’s alleged killer. On Thursday, prosecutors dropped all charges against Guandique, telling defense attorneys that new information had left them unable to prove their case.

New details about how the case unraveled emerged Friday from defense attorneys, who said the case was closed shortly after they and prosecutors received recordings from a Maryland woman of conversations she had with star witness and jailhouse informant Armando Morales.

“Who is this woman? What is her motivation for doing this,” Levy asked in a telephone interview from his home in Modesto, Calif. “Maybe she tricked him into saying those things.”

He says he still believes Guandique killed his daughter, despite the prosecutors’ decision to dismiss the charges. “The case is already solved. But this person [Proller] helped get” him out, he said. “You have to wonder why a person would do that.”

 

[rd_jfc]

Interesting.

I remember early on I had doubts about Guandique after I read a detailed history of his crimes. What made me wonder was that he had been accused in an incident where he broke and entered into a woman's apartment one week after Chandra Levy disappeared. In that case, the woman was middle aged and managed to scare him off by screaming, slapping and kicking at him. Made me wonder if he really was guilty of Chandra Levy's murder because being scared off by a woman screaming and flailing at him didn't exactly sound like a really dangerous predator.

I still have doubts that it was Condit, who just never seemed like a good suspect to me. For one thing, it was clear that under pressure, he did really stupid stuff.

I could easily be wrong but right now, I'm thinking the perp is probably someone who flew under the radar and may never have been a suspect at all.

Chandra didn't jog or exercise outdoors and certainly didn't take it up the day she disappeared, just dealing with where she lived and where she ended up should give any person great pause, after all, not one person claiming she did this has ever re-enacted it themselves, man or woman. But it needs to be a woman re-enacting it before I'll consider they know what they're talking about.

So why are people throwing Chandra into some situation where under the radar people or park predators are hunting her down? Does anyone have any idea where she was found? It is a lonely isolated forest on top of the tallest hill in DC, down in a ravine off a horse trail. I was there an entire afternoon and I think I saw two couples come through there walking their dogs. A woman would be insane to be up there alone deep in a forest on a horse trail and off on a path to nowhere. There's literally no one who could re-enact what's claimed who would continue to claim it.

However, the spot is at a picnic table on top of the hill that is ideal for driving through at night, pulling in to next to the picnic table, and hauling a bound body out the path to nowhere and down the steep hillside to hide the body. That is what would normally happen, and Chandra taking up death marchiing on the day she disappeared would be the last thing any reasonable person would propose.

But the DC police and prosecutirs weren't reasonable. They will do whatever it takes and tell whatever lies it takes to have Chandra place herself there through highways and byways with nothing but a Walkman cassette player, nothing, to become a victim as she knew as well as anyone as she preached safety, was a Modesto police intern, minored in Criminal Justice in college, studied self-defense, and never placed herself alone in danger.

Yet to make it convenient for DC to blame a park predator where her body was found, they completely ignored who would bring her body to that isolated spot and hide it.

And it wasn't someone under the radar. The care taken to hide her body, the trek down the side of that hill is very difficult, indicates someone who knew her.

That her ring and bracelet were missing but never pawned indicates a staged robbery but someone who knows her who can't risk being identified pawning it.

That someone took her keys without her having an id as to where she lives indicates someone who knows her.

That she was bound with her tights in sophisticated bondage indicates the person was comfortable using bondage.

That is what police and prosecutors should think about, someone on Chandra's radar, not under it.

rd

 

[SophieRose]

http://www.people.com/article/chand...-convinced-former-suspect-killed-his-daughter

Levy says that prosecutors told him there was very little if anything they could do to move the case forward, since, he says, the lead detectives who handled Chandra's homicide still believe Guandique is responsible.

 

[SophieRose]

Ingmar Guandique's arrest warrant for Chandra Levy murder from 2009

http://ticklethewire.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ingmar-guandique-arrest-warrant.pdf

 

[SophieRose]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/chandra-levy-miniseries-works-at-915897

TNT is hopping on board TV's true crime obsession.

Following the genre's breakout success with The Jinx, Making a Murderer and People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story, the Turner-owned cable network is developing a miniseries exploring the Chandra Levy case, THR has confirmed.

Produced by Sony Pictures Television, Keith Huff (ABC's American Crime) is set to adapt Scott Higham and Sara Horwitz's book Finding Chandra: A True Washington Murder Mystery. Higham, Horwitz and Huff are set to exec produce with Lawrence Kasdan on board as a co-EP and potential director, schedule permitting.

 

[MamaJoJo]

That's not very open minded. :tongue:

Ha! I see what you did there...very funny!

 

[Nova]

Gotta agree with this. Innocent people languish in jail for *years* after much stronger evidence absolving them of crimes is has been presented. I have a hard time believing the justice system would admit something is amiss in a case involving a non-legal resident who has been convicted of other attacks on women given their poor track record for exonerating completely innocent incarcerated U.S. citizens. Definitely something more compelling than a snitch taking back a statement since that often happens in those cases.

I understanding your thinking. But keep in mind that with a U.S. citizen the issue would be releasing the individual back into U.S. society. Here the consequence is only sending him back to his native country and letting him be "their" problem.