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

[Medea]

Eliot Spitzer was committing a crime as well as being a hypocrite having championed tougher laws for prostitution. Mark Foley wasn't committing a crime per se, but hitting on under age boys is pretty close. But, neither man committed murder to try and save himself, which is the relevant point I was possibly not making too clearly. There are also plenty of politicians who have successfully weathered the storm of a plain old affair with a consenting adult as well as having been convicted of actual crimes and still getting re elected.

I've never seen a shred of evidence that points to Condit as anything but a philandering husband who lied and stonewalled when he should have told the truth immediately.

 

[Texana]

Condit, again, clearly felt threatened by the disclosure of an affair with an intern; hence his evasion and outright lies to the DC police.


I would never underestimate what a rat will do when it's cornered.

 

[Medea]

There is a world of difference between lying and murder.

Obviously, there are still many who think he was involved in her death, but I don't, never did, there isn't any evidence AT ALL that supports he killed her or had her killed. Not circumstantial, not testimonial, nothing. People lie for a reason, but to me, his reason for lying is pretty convincing, he didn't want his affair to come out.

 

[LI_Mom]

There are also plenty of politicians who have successfully weathered the storm of a plain old affair with a consenting adult as well as having been convicted of actual crimes and still getting re elected.

If a standing president can do it & survive.... Conduit should have known he could bounce back also.


Politician's wife finding out her husband is having an affair....... stop the presses! lol

How many of them end their marriages when they find out their husbands cheated? Not many, I bet.

 

[Vegas Bride]

One reason I don't think he killed her is that he had left a message on her answering machine, he wouldn't have left that if he knew she was dead and there would be an investigation. He was a lying cheater but not a murderer imo
Poor Chandra imo was in the wrong place at the wrong time and it's very unfortunate that it took so long for her body to be found but it does look like she chose to go to the park by herself and while there she became a victim of a terrible crime.
People that are involved with a sordid affair have just as much chance to become crime victims just like anyone else.

If I were Condit and needed to get rid of Chandra I would not have killed her like this, it would have been a death that looked like an accident so there would not have been this big investigation.

VB

 

[Pepper]

Oh, I don't argue that it ISN'T news; I just wonder at the sense of perspective. I've been around the business a long time and you almost never see a 10 part series on anything at all. That's an astonishing commitment of time, effort and real estate on the page. I don't see any obvious news hook - not even an anniversary of note. And if the Post were sitting on something truly explosive - like a serious suspect, or evidence that Condit was connected - I doubt they'd hold it to the end of a multi-week, multi-part series - the danger such info would leak and they would be scooped on their own story is far too high.

It all just seems very strange to me.

For starters it has scandal, sex, politics, money, power, greed, corruption - all the makings of a great Jackie Collins novel.

 

[reportertype]

One reason I don't think he killed her is that he had left a message on her answering machine, he wouldn't have left that if he knew she was dead and there would be an investigation. He was a lying cheater but not a murderer imo
Poor Chandra imo was in the wrong place at the wrong time and it's very unfortunate that it took so long for her body to be found but it does look like she chose to go to the park by herself and while there she became a victim of a terrible crime.
People that are involved with a sordid affair have just as much chance to become crime victims just like anyone else.

If I were Condit and needed to get rid of Chandra I would not have killed her like this, it would have been a death that looked like an accident so there would not have been this big investigation.

VB

While I'm not convinced Condit had anything to do with her death, his phone calls simply means that if he did, he was already trying to cover his tracks. I can't even start to name the cases where a killer who knew the victim left "worried messages."

 

[Medea]

While I'm not convinced Condit had anything to do with her death, his phone calls simply means that if he did, he was already trying to cover his tracks. I can't even start to name the cases where a killer who knew the victim left "worried messages."

Yeah, but presumably his motive for killing her was to hide the affair, so him leaving a personal message on her home answering machine would make it more likely that the affair would become known, not less..so I'd say in this particular case its exculpatory...if he was trying to cover his tracks he would have directed a staff member to call instead of doing it himself...it shows much too much familiarity if the purpose of murder is to prevent the relationship from being found out.

 

[Seanibus]

For starters it has scandal, sex, politics, money, power, greed, corruption - all the makings of a great Jackie Collins novel.

I agree. But 10 parts? I have never, in almost 20 years in journalism, and many more years reading newspapers, seen a 10 part series on anything, let alone a sensational but largely meaningless murder case. It simply defies belief. You'd have to add together the Pulitzer winning series on Walter Reed in the Post and the Priest Sex Abuse Scandal in the Boston Globe to come up with that many articles. It simply defies journalistic sense.

 

[Medea]

Maybe the whole 10 parts aren't going to be all about the case per se, but are going to diverge into related issues such as trial by media, and the weird hysteria that surrounds certain high profile cases and why its some but not others...or go into the 'how did it all go so wrong with the investigation' type of angle.

 

[Vegas Bride]

While I'm not convinced Condit had anything to do with her death, his phone calls simply means that if he did, he was already trying to cover his tracks. I can't even start to name the cases where a killer who knew the victim left "worried messages."

I agree about other cases where someone left a message after the fact trying to show their innocence but thats people who would have been expected to call because they were their spouse or boyfriend etc. Condit believed no one else knew about their involvement so him leaving the message would do exactly what he wouldn't have wanted which is bring his name into it.

VB

 

[Pepper]

Since the Ramsey murder, I've never seen a bigger bunch of inept Keystone Kops than the bunch in DC that were in charge of this case. Were they really that dumb, or were they trying to cover up something?

Remember that Washington DC reports directly to Congress. There is no intermediary state protection. Congress funds the district and can hire and fire the federal employees in the district.

This is my belief and interpretation of events.

Chandra was only 22 years old. She was intoxicated with the power and privilege of her older boyfriend. She wanted a permanent relationship. I'm sure Condit told her all those things she wanted to hear and Chandra wanted to believe that Condit was in love with her. She pressed for a commitment, Condit was vague in his promises. Maybe Chandra was pregnant, or told him she was, or told him she wasn't on the pill and could be pregnant, or told him she was trying to get pregnant. Or maybe Chandra called Condit's wife Carolyn and told her that she and Gary were in love and were going to be together. I picture Chandra as being very "ballsy" so that something like this would not be out of character.

At this point, and since Condit was already seeing another woman, the flight attendant, (and maybe others, since he was a serial adulterer), he began to panic. He didn't want his reputation ruined. He didn't want his wife to know about his girlfriends. Some members of his staff not only knew about his girlfriends, but provided cover and transportation for his affairs. Once Chandra began to apply pressure for a more committed involvement, it would not be out of character for him to mention to his staff that Chandra was giving him grief, and he wishes she would just go away. At that point I can imagine that a loyal staffer would take it upon himself to do the boss a favor and get rid of the problem.

A call was made to Chandra by someone in Condit's office or employ setting up a goodbye meeting in the park. That person would pick up Chandra and take her to the meeting place. We all knew what happened then. While Chandra was being murdered, Gary Condit was safely conducting business on the hill, or possibly was with his wife who came to DC for a rare visit.

The Keystone Kops didn't take the Levy's calls seriously, and did not go to her apartment right away. When they did go to the apartment, they screwed up her computer so that the evidence of the park map was not discovered for months. Weeks went by before the park was searched, and they still missed the body, which was eventually discovered by a hiker and his dog over a year later. Was this negligence on the part of the PD, incompetence, or intentional favoritism for a member of the House Appropriations Committee?

Unfortunately I don't believe we will ever see Chandra's killer brought to justice. But I think there is a lot of evidence of the character of Gary Condit, and none of it is good. Look at all the lawsuits he filed against anyone and everyone. Many of those suits have now been dismissed.

 

[Medea]

Having lived in DC I can attest to the fact that virtually ever civil servant in the District is totally incompetant.

Your scenario is pure speculation as far as I can tell, it relies on one supposition after another.

Condit lied about having an affair with Chandra Levy, that's it. What was done to him in the media was ridiculous, and I know he won at least one of his lawsuits against Dominick Dunne.

 

[Texana]

Having lived in DC I can attest to the fact that virtually ever civil servant in the District is totally incompetant.

Your scenario is pure speculation as far as I can tell, it relies on one supposition after another.

Condit lied about having an affair with Chandra Levy, that's it. What was done to him in the media was ridiculous, and I know he won at least one of his lawsuits against Dominick Dunne.

Why was it ridiculous? Even if he is innocent completely (and I for one think he is physically but not morally innocent) he was deceptive and evasive. He had an affair with a girl, who was packing to go home, unwillingly, under the impression that he would leave his wife for her, and then she disappeared. He then downplayed the entire relationship, misled the police, and used every bit of his influence to hinder the investigation.

That doesn't sound ridiculous to me.

 

[Medea]

Why was it ridiculous? Even if he is innocent completely (and I for one think he is physically but not morally innocent) he was deceptive and evasive. He had an affair with a girl, who was packing to go home, unwillingly, under the impression that he would leave his wife for her, and then she disappeared. He then downplayed the entire relationship, misled the police, and used every bit of his influence to hinder the investigation.

That doesn't sound ridiculous to me.

The idea that Gary Condit was in any way responsible for Chandra Levy's death was and is ridiculous, in my opinion.

THe police repeatedly said he was not a suspect, there isn't any scintilla of evidence that he killed her or had her killed, nothing. In fact, having left messages on her answering machine after she disappeared would be a pretty good indication right there that he did not kill her to keep the affair quiet.

He was wrong to lie about the affair, and he was wrong to stonewall about it, but I don't see how he hindered the investigation at all since I don't think he knew anything. Her last computer search was of Rock Creek Park, if the police had found her body in Rock Creek Park within the first few days Gary Condit would probably still be in Congress and there would never have been a national witch hunt to smear him as involved in her murder.

 

[Texana]

So you really believe that when he talked to her on April 29th, the woman he was having an affair with, he didn't remember what they talked about the last time he talked to, when she disappeared on May 1?

You said specifically, "What was done to him in the media was ridiculous."

I pointed out that the media attention was understandable, given the circumstances, and now you say it's the idea that he was involved in her death that's ridiculous.

The idea that leaving messages on someone's answering machine somehow absolves them of all involvement (whether or not Condit was actually involved) is a little ridiculous. Scott Peterson, convicted murderer, did just that, too. It's proof of nothing other than the fact that Condit called her.

You also characterized the DC police (and all civil servants in DC) as notoriously incompetent, so the fact that they didn't officially announce Condit was a suspect is hardly convincing proof of his innocence.

 

[Texana]

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?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/specials/chandra/ch6_1.html

 

[lorelei]

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?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/specials/chandra/ch6_1.html

I think that Chandra Levy disappeared before these other attacks occurred, so it couldn't be that she was lured by someone who'd heard of them.

I hadn't heard of this Guandique guy before though. I'm not sure what to think about this park police officers story honestly- this suspect says he recognizes her, but the officer never tells anyone else that or even writes it down?

 

[Nova]

The idea that Gary Condit was in any way responsible for Chandra Levy's death was and is ridiculous, in my opinion.

THe police repeatedly said he was not a suspect, there isn't any scintilla of evidence that he killed her or had her killed, nothing. In fact, having left messages on her answering machine after she disappeared would be a pretty good indication right there that he did not kill her to keep the affair quiet.

He was wrong to lie about the affair, and he was wrong to stonewall about it, but I don't see how he hindered the investigation at all since I don't think he knew anything. Her last computer search was of Rock Creek Park, if the police had found her body in Rock Creek Park within the first few days Gary Condit would probably still be in Congress and there would never have been a national witch hunt to smear him as involved in her murder.

I don't know whether Condit was involved in Levy's death, but I don't understand your claim that such a proposition is "ridiculous."

As far as I know, you are correct that we have no direct evidence of his involvement in her death.

But we have a married man having had a clandestine affair, one that if revealed might have threaten his marriage and career. His mistress tells others the man will marry her; he appears to have had no intention of doing so and was already having affairs with others. And he lies about all this during the intial stages of a police investigation.

While I agree this isn't proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he killed his mistress, I don't believe you can find a police agency anywhere that wouldn't find this set of facts very suspicious. Well, maybe except for the Washington, D.C., police.

But there's nothing "ridiculous" in suspecting Condit.

===

P.S. to the poster who said Bill Clinton had an affair and survived it: Clinton never had to run for re-election.

 

[fran]

I had always suspected Condit. Well, he was an easy suspect, IMHO. Lots of reasons for him to want Chandra to disappear. That and the fact he lied to LE and withheld evidence or statements or whatever.

This other guy, the one who attacked the two joggers, is interesting, IMO. I'm not sure why LE didn't persue him more at the time. Or, maybe they did and it will say more further into the series.

I'll wait and see. I do see him as a strong suspect though.

It's conceiveable to me, that being her last day, not ever getting the chance to see that location or park, Chandra thought she'd do that before she left. She may have been just walking the trails enjoying the scenery and this guy appeared.

His not showing up for work that day, appearing beat up and such is damaging for him, IMO.

I'll wait for the rest of the series. I also think I'll check out the CNN site for the college students who are investigating this case. I'm almost sure they'll take an indepth look at this Salvadorian immigrant. Who knows? This fresh set of eyes (the criminal justice students) may uncover something LE missed.

JMHO
fran

PS.......If Condit's political career was ruined over this case AND he had nothing to do with Chandra's demise, that's his tuff luck, IMO. That's what he gets for being such a sleeze. ........fran