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

[Medea]

If you think there have never been murders committed in the name of power and political ambition, you are naive. They just have many people at their fingertips to "make things happen."

There is nothing now to prove Condit is involved, but there also is nothing to prove he wasn't. I'm just not a big believer in coincidences.

ETA: Yes I am reading the series. Nothing I've read so far changes my mind.

There isn't any evidence that Condit had a motive to kill her since ALL of the available evidence of what she told her friends and family was that she was in love with him and expected him to eventually marry her. Whether this is true or not, the evidence shows that this is what SHE BELIEVED within 48 hours of her disappearance. There are no computer records, letters, emails, diary entries, nothing that supports the idea that Condit would have any reason to need to get rid of her. The pregnancy idea, also completely unsupported by fact, its fiction, pure speculation.

WHY then when she's about to leave DC and he can let her down over time would he kill her, it makes no sense.

Her death in and of itself made it likely that his affair with her would come out. IF he had wanted to kill her he would have made it look like a suicide or a failed robbery...hit over the head, wallet stolen, body found ASAP.

If you want to hide an affair then you make sure the death is easily and quickly explained.

 

[Texana]

The computer evidence isn't a given, since the DC police seargeant first erased the history and it then took a police computer specialist a month to find the history of her web search for the mansion/park that day.

Do I think that Condit purposefully planned and premeditated her death? No.

Do I think he did it himself? No.

Do I think it's possible that he mentioned it as a "problem" to someone who then took care of it for him? Yes.

No one knows what things Levy may have known that went to her grave with her. You can't argue an unknown; that because all we know is that they had an affair, ergo, that was all she knew, or all she presented to him as a problem.

I don't discount the immigrant as a possibility, but I don't discount Condit, either.

 

[twinkiesmom]

People can believe what they want to believe but the facts remain

1. No evidence of any problems between Condit and Levy.

2. No known motive for her to be murdered.

3. No evidence she went to meet Condit.

4. No evidence he lied about anything other than their sexual relationship.

5. Strong evidence that another man killed her.

.

#1...Yes there was a conflict....He wanted to get rid of her and she was expecting a marriage and children.

#2....To keep her silent.....Did you watch any of the Anne Marie Smith interviews back in 2001? Condit was a control freak who demanded silence...

#3. According to inteviews, she left IDs and keys at home when she met Condit. The circumstances of her departure suggest a secret meeting.

#4...What about the gold bracelet he denied giving her? Chandra's word against Condit's. I go with Chandra.

#5..No evidence Guandique was involved.

 

[Texana]

Exactly, Twinkiesmom.

 

[tezi]

I am reading the series, and I am not convinced that Condit isn't involved. I am open to looking at this other suspect, but I still feel that Condit is a more viable POI.

 

[Pepper]

The computer evidence isn't a given, since the DC police seargeant first erased the history and it then took a police computer specialist a month to find the history of her web search for the mansion/park that day.

Do I think that Condit purposefully planned and premeditated her death? No.

Do I think he did it himself? No.

Do I think it's possible that he mentioned it as a "problem" to someone who then took care of it for him? Yes.

No one knows what things Levy may have known that went to her grave with her. You can't argue an unknown; that because all we know is that they had an affair, ergo, that was all she knew, or all she presented to him as a problem.

I don't discount the immigrant as a possibility, but I don't discount Condit, either.

That's what I believe too, Tex.

 

[fran]

That's what I believe too, Tex.

FWIW, I agree with you both! I haven't completely ruled out Condit. But, I am interested in learning more about this Salvadorian guy. I need to know MORE!!

Just sayin',
fran

PS......Whatever turns out, I'm glad Condit got caught with his hand in the cookie jar! He didn't deserve the trust of the people. IMO, fran

 

[Texana]

The odds of being killed by someone who knows you, I remember reading, are about 98%.

And as for Gary Condit being a victim of circumstances, the driver who happens to be under the railway overpass when a huge load falls off (true story) is a victim of circumstance.

Gary Condit engaged in risky behavior with his affair--part of the attraction, one might guess. Any consequences there of, were a result of his own decisions. They are known as "unintended consequences" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequence

but they are certainly not unknown consequences.

 

[wenchie]

IF he had wanted to kill her he would have made it look like a suicide or a failed robbery...hit over the head, wallet stolen, body found ASAP.

If you want to hide an affair then you make sure the death is easily and quickly explained.

I'm curious about how you know this?

Are you not aware of all the men who believed that the best thing they could do was make the unwanted woman "disappear" - forever?

Are you aware of all the men who staged accidents/murders to get rid of an unwanted woman - and got caught?

There are just as many men who think "I'll disappear her - no evidence - no crime - no connection to me.

Yet you seem to know that IF he wanted to kill her, he would have made it look like an accident or suicide.

Did he tell you this? How else would you KNOW?

 

[Grainne Dhu]

Mark Foley and Eliot Spitzer, for starters, are two politicians who would disagree with you about sex scandals ruining careers. And the infamous "Wide Stance" congressman as well, I can think of almost a dozen off the top off my head in the last two or three years alone.

However, the reason Spitzer's career was over was because he'd made his name as being a tough prosecutor, who went after more than one man who used hookers. Spitzer was well aware he had many enemies in high places, including the state legislature. It was the blatant hypocrisy that did him in rather than what he actually did.

Mark Foley didn't just have sex outside of marriage. He sexually harassed and sought out relationships with pages, some of whom were legally minors and all of whom he had power over that approximated the power of an employer over an employee. There were also allegations that he was using and supplying cocaine with pages.

Larry Craig, whose excuse became famous ("Wide Stance") got in trouble for a combination of hypocrisy and gay sex. Not just gay sex but involving a form of cruising that most hets find distasteful. Craig is still a US Senator but is not running for re-election this year. In the past, he has run on a "morals" platform and he was the leader of an effort to censure Barney Frank (who is openly gay; certainly has not hurt him!).

 

[Grainne Dhu]

Next chapter: The predator in the park, a 19 year old immigrant who is caught after attacking female joggers. The possibility arises he may have seen Chandra. Chicken or egg: Was Chandra lured to the park by someone who knew of the other attacks, and used it as a convenient copycat, or does the attacker know more than he's telling?

I don't suspect Condit of being anything more than a nitwit who should have known better than to lie to the police.

I'm not sure about Ingmar Guandique. For one thing, both of his known victims were tall, blonde women. Chandra was tiny and dark haired. For another, the two women he attacked fought back and he gave up very quickly. That would reverse the usual pattern of a rapist who gets more proficient with each attempt attack.

If Guandique killed Chandra, then within a week he regressed in effectiveness. In fact, on 7 May 2001 he broke into a woman's apartment and all she had to do to send him running was scream. That's a long, long way from the sort of drive it would take to kill a woman.

I don't believe Chandra was the sort to just freeze and give up (although no one knows for sure until they are in the situation). I think she would have fought and fought hard.

Yes, one woman remembers that around that time Guandique had a black eye, fat lip and scratches. But memory is malleable, especially about times and dates. Could she be mistaken about when she saw him that way? Two weeks after Chandra disappeared, Guandique attacked Halle Shilling who (among other things) drove him off by digging her fingers into his mouth under his tongue.

My ranking of suspects would be: a) unnamed serial rapist/serial killer; or b) Ingmar Guandique. I don't even have Condit on my list because there's no evidence at all that points to him and his possible motive seems highly doubtful to me.

I really wonder about who killed the other two women interns referenced in this subject.

 

[Grainne Dhu]

She was young and naive, but I don't think she would leave her cell phone and her keys behind in her apartment unless she was told to.

Something interesting I noticed, though. Both of the women Ingmar Guandique is known to have attacked were wearing Walkmans. Neither of the women he attacked were carrying cell phones or car keys. So if Chandra's actions seem unusual, she's in a group of at least three women who did not know each other who did exactly the same thing.

I think it's more likely that it's fairly normal for women going out to run to take only things they need for their run, rather than that the only three women joggers in the area to go out with Walkmans but without cell phones or car keys were all attacked.

I don't remember Chandra being an avid jogger. Since she was getting ready to leave town, and since her suitcase was packed, or nearly so, it doesn't make sense to me that she would pick that exact time to take a last minute jog.

She was known to be a gym rat and it's known that she cancelled her gym membership three days before she disappeared. I remember reading somewhere that she went to the gym almost every day.

Three days without a workout? A gym rat like Chandra would be getting pretty stirry. She did enough exercise to be noticeably muscled. She wasn't planning to fly out that day, she didn't have anywhere to go or anyone to see (no known appointments). She logged off her computer in the early afternoon; that left a lot of time before bedtime to just hang around and do nothing.

 

[Texana]

Those are good points about Guandique's victims, Grainne. It also seemed to me he was fairly easy to fight off, in terms of motivation.

However, in terms of politicians who lost their careers to sex scandals, each case is obviously different. Still, it doesn't matter what you or I thinks constitutes a career-threatening affair.

What matters is what Condit thought.

And as to whether or not he was capable of putting his own life before his, if he felt threatened: Again, he did just that.

He evaded and tried to avoid police questions at a time when it was obvious her life was endangered.

So there can really be no argument that he wouldn't have put his life and his career before hers, because he did just that, repeatedly.

You can argue there's no evidence he was involved in her death, but you can't argue logically that he didn't feel threatened, because his own lies show he did.

 

[AlwaysShocked]

A quick correction regarding Chandra having canceled her gym membership: On the washingtonpost website where the articles are published there is a person who wrote in to correct this. This man wrote a book about Chandra several years ago and he states that she tried to cancel the gym membership but the gym would not allow her to do so without a 30 day notice. So she was still a member of the gym at the time of her death.

At this point I don't think either Condit himself or the other guy named in the articles did it. But somebody had to get her far, far off the running trail and down into the woods? Did someone drag her that far?

Just trying to imagine how it could have happened that her body was found where it was - 80 some yards off the trail. That's pretty far to take someone who was presumably struggling?

 

[i.b.nora]

A quick correction regarding Chandra having canceled her gym membership: On the washingtonpost website where the articles are published there is a person who wrote in to correct this. This man wrote a book about Chandra several years ago and he states that she tried to cancel the gym membership but the gym would not allow her to do so without a 30 day notice. So she was still a member of the gym at the time of her death.

That guy is wrong. On May 7 or 8, 2001, police checked Chandra's apartment and found "two partially packed bags, clothes in the closet, dishes in the sink, toiletries in the bathroom, an open laptop computer, her cell phone, her running shoes, her driver's license, the receipt for her canceled health club membership and her credit cards. Her apartment keys and a gold signet ring are missing. The only thing unaccounted for - the police won't say if they have it or not - was the new gold bracelet that her parents are sure was a gift from Congressman Gary Condit."

Where in the World is Chandra Levy?

As I recall, at the time, it was explained that the '30 day thing' would allow her to use a particular gym in Modesto when she returned there, which she obviously was planning to do.

 

[Texana]

Next chapter: Chandra's aunt says that she called her about returning home with "big news;" Condit's wife is interviewed; attorney and police duel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/specials/chandra/ch7_1.html?hpid=topnews

 

[Grainne Dhu]

Those are good points about Guandique's victims, Grainne. It also seemed to me he was fairly easy to fight off, in terms of motivation.

That was what really struck me--it just reverses the usual pattern so thoroughly. A rapist who kills a woman and then in the next attack runs away within a minute when his next victim fights back?

However, in terms of politicians who lost their careers to sex scandals, each case is obviously different. Still, it doesn't matter what you or I thinks constitutes a career-threatening affair.

What matters is what Condit thought.

Excellent point.

The $64,000 question would then be: at what point did Gary Condit start feeling threatened? As you pointed out, he obviously felt threatened when he lied to the police.

Did he feel threatened when he left the message on her machine? I'm (obviously) thinking not; as Medea says, if he had known she was dead and wanted to avoid suspicion, he wouldn't have put out a big fat clue like that.

But it is true that people do really dumb things when they feel threatened. People also do incredibly ingenious things. All this would be so much easier if people would just be less complicated.

 

[Texana]

Exactly, people are so complicated. I think that's what Condit thought, too.

I think the answering machine phone call was intended as a cover, when he realized she was missing, he panicked that he would be a suspect. Now he goes from Nasty Old Man with Young Intern to Murderer of Young Intern, so he tries to cover up any knowledge of her being missing, while at the same time, continuing to downplay the affair.

A bit of a stretch, really, but I don't think he completely thought through that she might actually disappear. I think he used words like "I wish this problem could just disappear" and then it did.

In that sense, I don't believe he actually killed her. I believe he might have set in motion her death. There's enough money flowing around in earmarks, contracts, etc, that would make it very worthwhile for some parties to keep Condit in office AND stay on his good side.

 

[Texana]

Condit makes it hard for investigators to eliminate him as a suspect:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/18/AR2008071802612.html?nav=hcmodule

He's seen throwing away an old jewelry/watch box--away from his Washington home.

He has no real excuse for this, and he doesn't seem to understand why he looks suspicious doing this.

Dumb or arrogant or both? You decide, but if he was hounded by police, it was due to his own acts.

 

[Grainne Dhu]

A bit of a stretch, really, but I don't think he completely thought through that she might actually disappear. I think he used words like "I wish this problem could just disappear" and then it did.

If that is so, then he's not guilty of murder. He's guilty of expressing an unwise or intemperate wish, which is certainly distasteful but not (I think) illegal.

At most he might be thought to have solicited murder but if there was no discussion of payment or favours due, I doubt it's chargeable.

The biggest obstacle I see to that theory is that conspiracies are incredibly difficult to keep secret. If more than one person knows a secret, it's no longer a secret. For instance, look at the case of Helen Brach; she disappeared in 1977 and it seemed like a completely cold case for many years. But people talk and eventually her murderer was charged and convicted, even though her body was never found (probably thrown into a blast furnace).