www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index www.justiceforchandra.com
Justice for Chandra Levy and missing women
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

A letter to Law Scope. Why Chandra disappeared.

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Chandra Levy and missing women
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
benn



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 2136
Location: Sacramento, CA

PostPosted: Sun Apr 04, 2004 9:11 am    Post subject: A letter to Law Scope. Why Chandra disappeared. Reply with quote

Here is a letter I sent to Law Scope after reading a 2001 article of theirs of how the Chandra Levy case could be solved. I was waiting for them to answer before posting it, but rd said to post it because the Book is being printed up soon.

>>>Hello AskLawScope

I was reading a 2002 article of LawScope about the Chandra Levy murder investigation: How Chandra Levy's Murder Can Be Solved (by)
Chris Gordon, LawScope--and at the end of the article it says click if you have a question for Law Scope, or need information.

I have a question, and I need information. You may be able to answer my question without having any information that I would wish for.

Law Scope seemed to be optomistic at the time of the article that the case might be solved. I am still optimistic two years later, but a lot of news sources seem to have lost their fire, or interest.

My question concerns the Otis Thomas story that Otis Thomas, a Ceres, California Pentecostal Minister and landscape gardener, told to Chandra's mother, Susan Levy, in the backyard of the Levy home a month or two before Chandra disappeared.

Thomas told Susan Levy that his daughter had an affair with Rep. Gary Condit about seven years previously, which lasted about two years. That would have put the affair somewhere around 1994. A son was born to the daughter, Jennifer Thomas, during that time period, and the son supposedly might have been a result of the supposed affair.

Chandra had not disappeared yet when the minister told his story to Susan Levy. It seemed like a complicated story where Jennifer Thomas and Gary Condit had met at a political meeting.

The FBI picked up the story after Chandra disappeared, but then after a short time the FBI said that the Thomas story was not true.

After most of the news media had said that Thomas had lied seemingly all of the media completely left the story out of Chandra's timeline leading up to her disappearance. Many people reading today about the case might never even see a word about Otis Thomas.

But regardless of whether the story was true or false Susan Levy evidently thought it was true and was concerned about Chandra possibly being involved with Congressman Condit. Mrs. Levy contacted Chandra about Chandra possibly dating the Congressman and Susan told Chandra to find out about the supposed affair that Condit may have had with Jennifer Thomas seven years previously.

Chandra was upset with her mother but said she would talk to Condit. (All this is history that can be verified by the Levys, whether Thomas's story was true or false.)

What does this have to do with Chandra disappearing? It could have had a lot to do with Chandra's disappearance if Condit suspected that Chandra was talking to her family about him. At that time Congressman Gary Condit, known by some in Congress as Mr. Blow Dry, was known as a religious son of a minister in Stanislaus County, California. Congressman Condit had supported passing a bill allowing the Ten Commandments to be put in every school in the nation. (I may not have the Ten Commandments bill quite right, but at least the bill was pro Ten Commandments.) Here was a Congressman who had served 12 years or so in Congress and who was making a career of being a Congressman. He was well liked in his district. To a lot of people living in the Congressman's district that area was know as Condit Country. Also Condit attended bible study meeting in Congress. He had a wife and two children. He was a very well established politician in California, with his son Chad working for Governor Davis of California and the daughter, Cadee, also working for the Governor.

Before Chandra disappeared certainly very few people knew that the Congressman was a womanizer. The women themselves who came forward after Chandra disappeared can speak for themselves about that. The Levy family also had discovered that Chandra was dating the married Congressman.

So regardless of whether the Thomas story was true or false Chandra by talking to her family about her boyfriend Condit was putting Condit in jeopardy of being exposed as a man who was dating at least one woman while putting himself forward as a good family man. Whatever the exact sequence of events, that story could not fly for Gary Condit if he was to remain a Congressman and get re-elected.

The FBI completely hid the Thomas story away by saying that Otis Thomas had lied, but the FBI did not say that they had proved that Thomas had lied. To prove that Thomas had lied the FBI would have had to take a dna paternity test of Jennifer Thomas's son. They have not said that they did that.

Otis Thomas recanted his story, but probably with good reason. He and his daughter had evidently both received threats when his story became public, and the media was besieging him and his daughter. The FBI never did get around to finding Jennifer and talking to her

Chandra, in death, finally did expose the Congressman. Unknowingly she may have been exposing him in life, but in death some of the truth about the Congressman finally came out. Did Condit think that Chandra was a menace to him and was going to expose him to his constituents?

Condit was living out a career as a Congressman, Chandra was going to come into the way of him continuing to be able to get re-elected. Would that have been enough of a motive for Congressman Condit to want Chandta to disappear?

Law Scope, please excuse me for making this so long, but I think this episode about Susan Levy, Otis Thomas, Chandra, and Congressman Condit has to be told in as much of its entirety as possible to show the exact consequences of what Chandra was doing by talking to her family about Condit.

Chandra told her mother that Condit "explained it all." We do not know exactly what Chandra asked Condit, or if in fact she asked him anything, but it appears that she did. Even if she did not ask Condit Chandra evidently assumed herself to be in a romantic relationship with Condit, as some of his other girlfriends seem to have thought. Chandra was becoming a menace to Condit's political career.

Motive supplied. Additional evidence needed.

Law Scope, please answer the question or questions that my long winded letter brings up, if you have the time. Maybe you could write up an article about the Otis Thomas story, and about Chandra's friendship (at least on her part) becoming a menace to Condt. Was it enough of a problem to want to make Chandra disappear? What would have happened to Condit's career if Chandra had not disappeared?<<<

Yours Truly,
benf5@lanset.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
benn



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 2136
Location: Sacramento, CA

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I finally got a reply from Law Scope. It is more comprehensive than I thought it was when I first looked at it. Nothing new, but a lot of the things we know all in one place. I guess that Law Scope might be a good place to try to get information on some legal aspects of the Chandra investigation, such as grand juries, secret police files, how to determine if there was a coverup, etc.

To: benf5@....
Subject: Re: A question for Law Scope about the Chandra Levy murder investigation.
From: Asklawscope@aol.com
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 19:53:35 EDT

Thanks for writing LawScope.

Our research turned up this story from fresnobee.com. that quotes the
Washington Post. If you go to Google, it appears that CNN had a story in 2001 that
the minister may have recanted or withdrew his allegations.

We suggest you contact fresnobee.com them to see if there is any update

LawScope<<<<


Fresnobee.com: Condit is linked to a new affair
FBI inspects seized items as man alleges daughter had '94 affair with
lawmaker.
Petula Dvorak and Allan Lengel, The Washington Post
(Updated Monday, July 23, 2001, 1:52 PM)


E-mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Format
Receive the Daily Bulletin
Subscribe to Print
Join a Forum


WASHINGTON -- FBI agents looking into the disappearance of Chandra Levy have
approached and interviewed a Pentecostal minister who described an affair
between his then-18-year-old daughter and Rep. Gary Condit, telling investigators
that the Ceres congressman had warned her never to speak of the relationship.
Four law enforcement sources confirmed that the father, Otis Thomas, has been
questioned by the FBI and that investigators are interested in talking to his
daughter. Thomas, who described what his daughter told him of the affair,
said he has encouraged her to talk to the FBI but that she is afraid to do so and
has gone into hiding.
Thomas said the relationship took place about seven years ago and that it
ended in a tense breakup initiated by his daughter. Thomas said he decided to
describe his daughter's account to FBI agent Todd Irinaga because he learned that
the relationship was discussed by Levy and Condit in April, about two weeks
before the 24-year-old intern from Modesto was last seen.
Thomas' daughter, who is now in her mid-20s, declined to discuss any aspect
of the case. "I don't want to talk about any of that," she said in a brief
telephone conversation this week.
Marina Ein, a spokeswoman for the Democratic congressman, Wednesday accused
The Washington Post of joining "the ranks of tabloids who have come to us with
specious questions about a supposed affair."
"These questions are destructive, unfair and irrelevant," Ein said. "In fact,
we are constantly placed in the impossible position of having to prove a
negative. This is something we will not do."
Condit's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said: "This is beneath the dignity of The
Washington Post."
Thomas' account of his daughter's affair with Condit has been known to the
Levy family since mid-April, before Chandra disappeared. By then, the Levy
family knew Chandra was having a relationship with the congressman, according to
family members.
Thomas, who has parlayed his weekend groundskeeping at his Modesto church
into a weekday free-lance gardening business, has done work at the Levy home for
about four years.
He had a conversation with Chandra's mother, Susan Levy, in April while he
was tending roses in the back yard. The conversation continued by the pool,
where Susan Levy brought him a cold drink. The two often talked about their
children, and Thomas said he asked Susan Levy how Chandra was doing in Washington.
Susan Levy replied that Chandra was doing well and that she had befriended a
congressman, Gary Condit.
"Mrs. Levy asked me if I know Gary Condit and asked me what I think about
him," Thomas said. "She said she was asking about him because her daughter was
friends with him in Washington."
Thomas said he remembered that his daughter had asked him for advice about
seven years ago, when she wanted to break off a bad relationship. He said he had
been shocked when she told him the man she was seeing was Condit, whom she
said she met at a political rally at California State University, Stanislaus.
"Lord have mercy, I told her she has to be around men her own age," Thomas
said.
He said he advised her to end the liaison immediately. She did so, and the
two never spoke of it again, he said. "I didn't really think much about it since
then, until Mrs. Levy asked me about him," Thomas said.
At the Levy house that day, Thomas said he and Susan Levy talked about
Condit, gingerly at first.
"Then Mrs. Levy asked me if I've ever heard anything about him and other
women," Thomas said.
The two eventually confessed to each other that both their daughters had
relationships with Condit. "I told Mrs. Levy that with my daughter, it ended
badly, that I think her daughter should end the relationship with him right away,"
Thomas said.
He says Susan Levy then got on the phone and called Chandra in Washington. He
said he heard the mother argue with her daughter.
"Mrs. Levy talked to Chandra about it, but Chandra told her mother to mind
her own business, that she was a grown woman who could deal with it," Thomas
said.
Susan Levy confirmed she had the conversation with Thomas and said she had
sparred with her daughter about the relationship with Condit over the phone.
In mid-April, when the Levys were in the Washington area to celebrate their
daughter's birthday, Chandra Levy told her mother that she had talked to Condit
about the affair described by Thomas and that the congressman had "explained
it all" to her, Susan Levy said.
About two weeks later, April 30, Chandra Levy canceled the membership at her
Washington health club. She has not been seen since.
In May, when Thomas and his daughter saw news accounts of Levy's
disappearance, he said his daughter became upset. She told him that Condit had warned her
after the breakup not to tell anyone about the relationship, Thomas said.
After Chandra disappeared, Susan Levy said she asked Thomas specific
questions about the relationship between Condit and his daughter, which he provided.
The Levys notified the FBI, which then approached Thomas. <<<<

This reply is a lot longer than I thought it was when I first looked at it. It has a lot of the material that we already know in one place.

benn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting, they quoted the Washington Post story of what he told them but not the article where he recanted, but they refer to it. In any even, a very comprehensive response.

Sadly, there is no update since OC recanted. Not a murmer in the press. We'll flush something out with this book though.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
peripeteia



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 1173
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2004 1:17 pm    Post subject: Motive for Murder Reply with quote

Benn I think you have done an excellent job of parapharsing the evidence that there could possibly be a motive for murder in the case of the death of Chandra Levy.

Add to the evidence the sensitive nature of the material Chandra was working on at the Bureau of Prison regarding Timothy McVeigh. Chandra at the time of her death was privy to the information about Jennifer Thomas and possibly other women and that his wife might not be as sick as Gary stated.

Given Condits past reactions to women he was dating that pryed into his personal life; this nullifies the significance of Jennifer as having a past relationship or child with Gary. He would have known that Chandra had told her Mother, whether Chandra revealed this or not. It would not take too long to discover who Ottis Thomas was and that he was working for Susan Levy. I do not think that Condit is an overly intelligent man, but what he would have is fairly good survival skills. If Chandra told him about Jennifer Thomas, Condit if he did not know her or not would have had this investigated and discovered that she had a twin sister and a Father, he would have checked out all three Thomases, where they worked who their partners were etc. Condit would have known where they worked. Many people would have known that Thomas was Susans' gardener. Anyone accused of Fathering a child would have checked this out, and have had this matter investigated especially a congressman.

Chandra told many people about the Congressman. Given what we know about the confidentiality of Gary, Chandra would have been a train wreck regarding security. I figure Condit's street sense told him he was in way too deep. Chandra was yaking about Condit to whomever would listen, full blown conversations with some, and others hinting very closely about the affair.

Jennifer Baker we know was intimidated, however the Levys' were not pleased with what Jennifer had told the police and the public, that the story that Paul Katzs' tells is that Jennifer had a different story in the Levys' front room?!

If Chandra did tell Gary Condit anything about the Thomas affair, this would not have been good news. Somehow, I get the feeling that Gary might have been real upset about this, so much so, my good sense would have warned me not to go there with the person had I been Chandra.

Chandra like myself, might have gone looking for the information on her own and got caught???However, my feeling is that perhaps, Chandra was not all that mature regarding her relationship with Gary, nor grounded in reality. The absurity of buying into a five year plan is incomprehensible to me, so it is difficult to imagine what a brillant glamourous rich educated woman would be into such a senario. Something is twisted in the psych here. Therefore, it is my guess that Chandra did not let this go by, but did indeed bring this to the attention of Gary. Whether Jennifer and Condit did have a relationship is only secondary, the main issue would have been with Gary is that Chandra had done the unthinkable and had discussed this with someone.

I would think that since Chandra was already in a mood to confront Gary, as advised by Sven Jones, it seems very very plausible that having this information about an affair, and if she was looking to find out about Jennifer Thomas, my guess is she might have found out allot more. Especially since Anne Marie had discovered Gary was having an affair with another woman (Chandra). How much work would it have taken to find out if Condit had other affairs, Chandra went to the office of Gary, was there backroom talk, had Chandra become familiar with anyone in Condit's office that would have told her what a dirt bag he was. There are people in Sacramento that would have known about Gary's behavior and in Ceres, Merced, Modesto, and all over the place. There would have been rumours circulating that Gary Condit was a lady's man.

It is odd that Susan and Thomas never spoke about this again, did Thomas stop working for the Levys'. Given that Susan is quit a talker and was upset about her daughter missing shortly after, I cannot imagine that Susan would never have brought this up again. It was reported in the News that Susan went to visit Jennifer and she would not speak to Mrs. Levy? You would think than that Susan would want to talk to Thomas after this, or to ask him why he lied?????

I think very much so that the Thomas Affair whether true or not was the catalyst that in someway lead to chandra being dismissed from the Bureau of Prisons, and that she was dismissed from Gary's presence in Washington. This may not have sat well with Chandra, certainly Gary would have viewed her as a security risk. Chandra had to go, now whether or not he arranged her death, whether or not it was an accident, whatever happened to Chandra was a direct result of what was going on in her life. She may have come into harms way because of her behavior that being distraught ,about Condit and her career, Chandra did react in a fashion that she would not normally have done as she must have been very upset about the recent events that occured before her death. This may have put Chandra in harms way.

There are other possibilities however, given that his wife was in town, Anne Marie was in town, the information that Chandra had revealed to Gary about the Thomas situation, what Chandra may have found out on her own, is worthy of much further investigation, and that the synconicity of these events somehow led to Chandra's death.

Whether or not her death was coincidential dispite a possible motive, it seems more possible that it may have been planned. One thing for sure, if it was coincidential that Chandra fell into the path of a killer, then she was on that Horse path because of having been gilted by Gary or because she was upset at what she learned of late, that her boyfriend was an vivid liar and womanizer.

The evidence leans more heavily that Chandra's death may have been planned, so there must be a motive, or else, someone with an urged to kill knew her well.

Ironically there is one connection to all four of the women who were murdered The University crowd, in particular Grad School. How odd that we have heard nothing hardly from the class mates, or school budies that would have known one another at the internship university program from California, shortly after Chandra died, I believe it was disbanned. All four women who mysteriously died that were washington interns had in common, knowing some of the same people. Whom might these people be? Also, all four persons were in contact with government employees, salaried and elected officals, who are these men/women. There are people these women would have meet in common likely partied with in common.

It is known that Joyce received a phone call before she was killed. We know that Chandra was anxious to get in touch with Gary Condit and he was not responding, and his wife was in town. Did Chandra then call up someone she knew from the University or in Washington? We know that Christine was at a party, had she been followed from the party to home. Or was the lurk just waiting for anyone to walk by. Who had been at the party. It is alleged that Caitlain Mahoney may have taken on the status quo in Washington at the White House regarding sexual conduct during the Clinton adminstration. Given that she was working at Starbucks says that she was not accepted into the fold of working for the Government, in other words, she must not have gotten a good recommendation to be hired in the government system.

What we also know is that Joyce Chaing was under investigation for an internal matter at Immigration, I don't know if we know the nature of this for sure?

We know that Christine was brillant in her field of cellular biology. One beings to wonder if she studied under or knew the man that was killed in Memphis, the celluar biologist who allegedly blew off the bridge from a passing truck and floated 200 odd miles down the river to Nachez area?????

Were all these women shit disturbers, were they all a thorn in someone's side, did they all know some people in common that have not come forward, or that police gave no thought to them as suspects.

It is compelling that Condit knew both Joyce and Chandra?

Whom might all these people have known in common associated with the university crowd and the intership programme, what civil servants and politicans knew these women in common.
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blondie



Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 567

PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2004 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you know for sure that Chandra and Joyce were both known by Condit?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peripeteia



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 1173
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2004 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blondie: Sorry I cannot quote the source but the information if I remember correctly is that Condit's office was next to Berman's Office where Joyce worked. Condit was allegedly questioned by police about Joyce's disappearance. Condit and wife were in town the day Joyce was murdered. Gary Condit was on a committee re: Red Woods of California hearings. Joyce was also on this committee. Found the latter information re: Red Woods myself on line. There was a rumour that both Joyce and Condit were in Spain at the same time, however, whether they ever met up there was no proof.

So to say I'm absolutely certain about anything I've just said, I could only validate that Condit and Joyce were on the committee of the Red Woods together. I believe that Denis Edeline was there as a lobbyist employed by Doug Bosco. Denis was Chandra's landlord. Bosco and Condit were allegedly friends, a supporter perhaps?
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blondie



Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 567

PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2004 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I WISH WE COULD TIE JOYCE DIRECTLY TO HIM. He covered his tracks very well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
benn



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 2136
Location: Sacramento, CA

PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kate and blondie, Joyce Chiang's brother is around somewhere. I think his name is Roger. He might be open to corresponding with anyone who was trying to find out what happened to his sister.

I might write to him sometime but not right now. I don't know enough details about that case.

If we keep going like this I think that we will find out things that we don't know, and we will find out things that we do know that lead to something else. Sort of like a jigsaw puzzle. I hope rd's book stirs people's interests up a little. It has been a long time since Condit has been in the news very much.

Every thing you say makes sense, kate. We just don't know the exact details.

benn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peripeteia



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 1173
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Sun Apr 25, 2004 5:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TERRANCE GAINER, ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF, WASHINGTON, D.C. POLICE DEPARTMENT: Everybody gets the same treatment. We're no -- have no more authority to haul the congressman in than anybody that's average Joe suspect in. If you're going to arrest someone and make a custodial interrogation, you either have to have a warrant or probable cause, and we haven't had those things.
from interview on CNN crossfire

http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0107/17/cf.00.html

It appears that the police did not feel that they had adequate information to bring in Gary for questionning?! I personally think that the fact that he witheld information regarding that he expected Chandra to take the train, given that Gary last spoke to Chandra on April 29th, by the fifth Condit should have concluded that Chandra arrived then, as he had already indicated that he and Chandra were friends it would be feasible that Chandra would have shared when she was leaving, so to withold this information that Chandra was coming by train, this is extremely relevant to question Condit further and to consider him a suspect.

There would be no necessity to say that you were having a relationship, but that you were friends and Chandra had advised she would be leaving in a few days (after the 29th) and coming by train. So why does he hid this fact from the Levees.

If then Condit knew this information, that she did appear to be missing, what would have any person done in the same circumstances, taking into consideration, that a constituents family had called him in a 911 situation to find there daughter. What does Condit do but withold this information. At the time of this crossfire airing, Condit had yet to reveal the train information. As the police had made no statement regarding that Chandra was suppose to take the train, it is fair to assume that Condit had not told the police this fact.

Condit as you know he waits two days before notifying the police of a missing person, when specifically asked by the constituents parents to act on their behalf to find their daughter. I think that this is worthy of a complete investigation, of examining phone records to see exactly what Condit did. Why he did not contact the police, the train company, his brother, the FBI, why he witheld this information from the police, and the blantant disregard for the emotional well being of Chandra's parents makes Condit look very suspicious that he is hidding something. There is no way that Condit should have gotten off without answering these questions before a grand jury.

Whether or not Condit was or is a suspect in Chandra's murder is a mute point, the fact that he witheld information at a critical time during Chandra disappearance needs to be answered, even now. This is suspect. This is critical, because had the police known this earlier, it is likely that Chandra's body would have been found. To my knowledge the first inkling that we heard about the train scenario was in the interview with Connie Chung, Aug. 23rd!!! Certainly, Condit had not told the Levy's this information. So why does someone hid something like this. Whom did condit call in the two days that he waited, until the 7th to notify the police.

Why did Condit not call his brother in the police force in modesto, would not it have been obvious that if Chandra was not in Washington that she might be somewhere in the modesto area, could have stopped off at a friends for a few days before going to her parents. Did Condit notify the modesto police that her whereabouts was unknown and to keep an eye out for her. There would have been no loss of confidentiality that his brother Burl would have to make, as the complaint of a missing person had come from the Parents of the missing daughter.

I have run this scenario around until I'm sick about thinking of possible reasons why condit might have done what he did, witholding the information from her parents, police and waiting two days before he does anything with the information. The matter then becomes what Condit did not do. This has as aspect to it that begs intense scrutiny. Condit after his initial interview with the police, he waits almost three weeks after their second visit when he advised the police this was not a good time. Why did Condit do this, this is was not helpful from an investigative or publicity point of view???????

Condit has no alibi for the afternoon of the 1st of May, other than his secretary that he gave a 49% salary increase to, for a salary of almost 100,000.00. This is suspect.

Granted the police are correct that there is not significant information to warrant an arrest, however, it appears that the Congressman was treated with kid gloves, and still Condit has not given the full details to the grand jury. This requires an explanation from the police how Condit is still free not to answer the questions of the grand jury regarding Chandra's disappearance????

This is just my personal opinion.

Benn I think that letters and lobbying must go on to bring Condit back to the grand jury to answer the questions regarding Chandra's disappearance.
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
benn



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 2136
Location: Sacramento, CA

PostPosted: Sun Apr 25, 2004 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your comments, kate. There are a lot of things in the investigation that can be done over again, or gone over again. The big obstacle there is that no one wants to get involved. The DC police did not want to stir up any politicians, and the politicians were all concerned with other things, mostly votes. Politicians are constantly campaigning. That is the reason that I think that if we can get this investigation more into the political field, then a few people will start to talk, or at least not be afraid to get involved.

The investigation was flawed almost from the start. Regardless of what Condit did the DC police did not accept the offer of trained volunteer searchers with dogs to help look for Chandra. Condit was not acting like a man who had lost a friend, he seemed to be acting more as if he knew what had happened to her. He said something like, "It is not proper for us to be talking about the investigation." A missing person case, and no one should talk about it, that is crazy. But no one in authority has challenged Condit.

The political aspect of the investigation helped to cover everything up. Eleven weeks before the apartment of the intimate friend of Chandra could be inspected, and then without a search warrant that would have allowed the police to take the pants that Abbe Lowell would not let them take, that definitely was not acceptable. The politics was there, impeding the investigation.

That is the reason I think we should look at the investigation more from a political viewpoint, and get more of the details of the investigation out into the open where they can not be covered up.

I think Mike Doyle of the Mod Bee is a good person to write to, kate. I don't like to write to him too often, but if you start writing to him and telling him the things that you are writing here I think that might stir things up, in Doyle's mind at least. The reporters have to stick to the guidelines of their newspapers or they don't have a job.

I have been thinking here, and maybe what we need here is a topic just about the Chandra Levy murder investigation. We would have to ask rd on that, and figure out the best way to format the topic. Right now we have things scattered all over the site here. The old archives can be for reference, but the investigation topic maybe should just be about current events that we are doing right now, such as we are doing right here.

We have been depending a lot upon news stories, but from now on maybe we will have to be making the stories ourselves. I posted a reply at Free Republic about the Chandra case. I was sort of late on my reply. They have a new format, and I could not figure out how to post a new message.

They are mostly conservatives there, and I thought maybe I could stir up some Republicans enough to start getting some answers, that should have came from the investigation. I will have to watch there, and see what comments there are.

One of the most important things that we know, as fact, or at least it should be a fact, is that Condit deceived his constituents, probably for the entire time that he was in Congress and when he was first elected to Congress. That seems to be established that Condit was deceiving the voters.

That seems to mean that if Condit let any information about his concealed activities slip out, that his career in Congress would be in grave jeopardy. Grave jeopardy might be a good expression, because how could Condit keep people who knew about him from eventually letting the whole world know about him? How could he silence anyone? If he did not keep all of his intimate friends quiet, his job was gone.

I think I will write to Mike Doyle expressing some of these thoughts, and your thoughts, kate. I wish others here would also write to Doyle. Another person to write to is Joseph D. McNamara, the former police chief of San Jose, California, a former police chief in Kansas, and a former member of the NYPD.

McNamara has a Ph.D. and is a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute at Stanford, California. I grew up in my grammar school years in that area. When I emailed him he replied right away. We can't expect the news reporters and the police to always do a good job, we are going to have to stir them up to do a good job.

cheers
benn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peripeteia



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 1173
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Sun Apr 25, 2004 9:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've never received a letter from anyone I wrote to yet regarding this case, perhaps it is because my email address is Canadian. I have written to doyle and the modbee on numerous occassions and it is the canadian address which might be a turn off, if I had msn, or aol, or even hotmail, I'm more likely to get a response.

I will write some more, no harm done, and I need to write to the DA in Washington and Modesto. So I'll get at it. Perhaps too rd's book will generate some publicity and a renewed digging and investigation into this case. The campaign I figure would be to send condit back to the grand jury. He now has no reason not to reveal information as he is no longer a congressman.
kate
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sun Apr 25, 2004 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, it's not you or being in Canada, kate. I've never received a response from either email or postal mail. I apparently haven't said anything worth responding to. :)

benn, sadly a topic on the investigation would be very sparse indeed. It would be empty.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
benn



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 2136
Location: Sacramento, CA

PostPosted: Sun Apr 25, 2004 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I realize that I am over enthusiastic, rd.

I am thinking now would it be practical to send a copy of the book to some of the DA's or Police Chiefs.

I have received a few very short replies from Doyle. I encourage everyone to write to Joseph D. McNamara. I am looking for his address. Here is a promo on him. On the other hand it may be that some people in high places get too important. 11 weeks to get into Condit's apartment to search it. Anyone too important can be swayed, maybe in the wrong direction.

>>>>

Home | News | Get Involved | Search
About Hoover | Library & Archives | Research | Fellows | Publications & Outreach
HOOVER INSTITUTION

Joseph D. McNamara was appointed a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, in 1991. He was chief of police for the city of San Jose, California, for fifteen years. He is recognized as an expert in criminal justice, police technology and management systems, crime prevention, and international drug control policies.

McNamara's career in law enforcement spans a thirty-five-year period. He began in Harlem as a beat patrolman for the New York City Police Department. He rose through the ranks and in midcareer was appointed a criminal justice fellow at Harvard Law School, focusing on criminal justice research methodology. Following this appointment he took a leave from police work and obtained a doctorate in public administration at Harvard. Returning to duty with the NYPD, he was appointed deputy inspector in charge of crime analysis for New York City.

In 1973 McNamara became police chief of Kansas City, Missouri, leading that department into groundbreaking research and innovative programs. In 1976 McNamara was appointed police chief for the city of San Jose, where he remained until his retirement in 1991. During his tenure, San Jose (the third-largest city in California and the eleventh largest in the United States) became the safest city in the country, despite having the fewest police per capita. The San Jose police became a model for innovation, community relations, utilization of technology, and productivity. The department's advanced training and computerization programs have been duplicated throughout the world.

McNamara has served as lecturer and adjunct professor at five different colleges and has lectured at many of the nation's top universities, including Harvard, Stanford, and the University of California at Berkeley. In 1980, he was appointed by the U. S. attorney general to the advisory board of the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

He has been a commentator for National Public Broadcasting radio and has appeared on Meet the Press, Good Morning America, the Today Show, CBS Morning News, the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Crossfire, Nightline, Oprah, Donahue, Larry King Live, Sixty Minutes, and other programs.

He has been a consultant for the United States Department of Justice, State Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and some of the nation's largest corporations. Over the past decade, McNamara has organized four conferences at the Hoover Institution, attended by police chiefs and command officers, focusing on U. S. drug control policies.

McNamara has written five books, including three national best-selling detective novels and a respected crime prevention text. He has published articles in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, the Kansas City Star, Newsday, Harper's, Cosmopolitan, National Review, USA Today, the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Jose Mercury News, and other publications. In addition, McNamara is sought as a lecturer throughout the country.<<<

I did not find his address. He used to have three addresses at Hoover Institution.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Chandra Levy and missing women All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group