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 

100K reward for Chandra murder
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Chandra Levy and missing women
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
blondie



Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 567

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I couldn't agree more!!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
benn



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

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
My point isn't that Condit didn't do it, my point is why did he do it when it does not seem to be the normal way to pledge money for a reward fund. For example, had Chandra not been found, the fund would still be holding his $10K?


Rd and blondie, but if you knew that Chandra would not be found alive, and that she would be found, then it seems like a reasonable way to put up a reward.

I am not saying that any of those things are true, but it seems like a truly vigorous investigation would look at everything from all angles. If they had looked at all angles vigorously then they could have eliminated some angles. For example a certain paternity dna test was never made, so we still do not really know what the result would be on that. Geragos seemed to know that Chandra would be found, and in what condition she would be found. Finding Chandra would have gotten the Condit's reward money back into his pocket.

Condit can keep an innocent silence on all of these events, but is he able, and capable, of getting up on a witness stand and rebutting them? Of course it takes skillful lawyers to ask the right questions so that they do not impose on someone's civil rights. Condit seemed to skip all of that in his civil trials.

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



Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 567

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm starting to like the way things are done in Aruba - too much emphasis on 'civil rights" in US. Quilty people have gone free because some smart lawyer got him off because of civil rights.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



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

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

and they actually say that someone who seems to know aomething is a suspect. Here they say we can't call anyone a suspect.

benn, the problem is that they already tried to quetion Condit in front of a grand jury and he took the Fifth. Under our Constitution, no one can do any more than that. H erefues to answer questions under oath or with a lie detector, and he has that right as we all here acknowledge.

The questions had to be asked of others, and they weren't. Everyone is deferring to Washington, and the DC police and FBI are tossing it back and forth to each other like a hot potato, like they'll get burnt if they handle it.

So it doesn't get handled. Life goes on, except for Chandra.

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: Sat Jun 25, 2005 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rd, I am just wondering where, if anywhere, that the political Christian Right fits in here. I don't consider myself to be part of the Christian Right. I think that Christian Right is mostly a term that some politicians like to use to try to get more votes.

Yes, so there is a lot of politics involved, but not much crime investigation. It is too bad that none of the Levy attorneys did much either. I think the Levys hired the wrong attorneys, attorneys who were politically correct.

Condit, though, is not entirely free and clear. He is subject to running into legal quagmires where he may not want to answer questions under oath, but he may almost be forced to. It looked like he was going to have to answer questions in his civil cases, and that is when the cases got settled fast.

We will see. A good attorney working for the Levys could probably put Condit into a quagmire that he could not get out of. Some private organization might also be able to hire an attorney who could stand up for Chandra's rights. Maybe that is where the law is going wrong. The accused gets an attorney, and the State has the prosecutor for an attorney, but the victim is not given an attorney. A prosecutor is speaking for the State, but it takes a private attorney to be able to speak for the victim.

That could change the legal system, if in each criminal trial the victims all had attorneys of their own.

That might make the lawyers happy also. Someone has to be on our side!!!!!

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



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

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's my take on it. Most people outside of Washingington believe Condit did it, but no one in Washington wants to it to be true.

I think law enforcement sees a no win here. With no foresnsic evidence, there is no point in pursuing it. That I think is their bottom line.

The Christian Right, like Washington Republicans and Democrats, wouldn't want to see one of their own as having done this.

Modesto is apparently embarrassed at being the home of men like Condit and Peterson. They would rather people forgot about Modesto rather than finding out what their congressman was capable of.

I would say the universal refusal of every person involved in this case to speak about it is the most telling. So no, nothing will be done.

If you can make a woman disappear without leaving a trail of blood, you will get away with murder. The sad part of it is that the only person that would want to make them disappear is the man they trust and love.

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 Jun 26, 2005 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

>>>Here's my take on it. Most people outside of Washingington believe Condit did it, but no one in Washington wants to it to be true.<<<

In that case there should be some effort to try to get some outside authority to investigate the case. There is precident for that. Geological changes are made for juries, for judges, for trials, for prosecutors, etc. I am probably not stayng that correctly, but the principle applies, if there is a conflict of interest then something has to be changed.

We had that recently in the Sacramento area. There was a highschool board that voted two to two to get rid of their popular football coach. The fifth school board member did not vote on the decision because he was the father in law of the coach being fired. The majority of the school district were in favor of the ousted football coach, so the school board had another vote. This time the vote was that a certain Supervisor, or someone similar, would make the decision on who the football coach would be. This time the father in law of the coach voted, on letting the Supervisor decide who the coach would be. That sort of eliminated the father in law from having a conflict of interest.

That pleased most of the members of the school district. Actually the coach two board members tried to get rid of is also a teacher at the school, and all of the coaching jobs are extra jobs for regular schoolteachers. Many other coaches were going to quit their coaching jobs in protest. Now there may be a special election to vote for or against the two school board members who tried to get rid of the football coach.

Now if we could figure out something like that in the Chandra Levy case. Some good legal heads could figure something out, but those kind only work for money.

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



Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 52
Location: Tulsa, Ok

PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 7:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I think law enforcement sees a no win here. With no foresnsic evidence, there is no point in pursuing it. That I think is their bottom line.

The Christian Right, like Washington Republicans and Democrats, wouldn't want to see one of their own as having done this.


You can still charge and convict someone without forensic evidence if there is other corroborative evidence such as a confession, a witness, prior assaults ... etc. In this case you have no evidence period. That's the problem.

Gary Condit was never a part of the Christian Right. He may have presented himself as a family values candidate much as Al Gore did, but he was no more Christian Right than Gore was. If there was any evidence against Condit the Christian Right would want him held accountable just like any other murderer. Again there's the problem - no evidence.

-Rich
_________________
All things being equal, the simplest answer is usually best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rd



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

PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That is true, not that good people would ignore the evidence, they just didn't want to go there to get it. At the time he was certainly believed to be a fundamentalist Christian, most of his constituents didn't even believe he had these relationships based on that.

My point is that we have no evidence because Chandra's disappearance wasn't pursued as a murder because Condit convinced DC police she was obsessed and suicidal.

In my opinion the Levys should sue him for that and force Washington to confront their sins of not finding out why the Bureau of Prisons is lying about how they immediately terminated Chandra's internship a week before she disappearaed, about whether Darrel was not working on May 1 as his co-workers said, about who Jennifer Thomas' father of her child is, and about why Guandique was allowed to be smeared by Geragos to throw suspicion off Condit instead of cleared as should have been done. These and many other questions should be answered or else Condit and DC sued by the family.

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 Jun 26, 2005 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wrote this before I read your last message rd, but I don't see much reason to change any of it.

>>>You can still charge and convict someone without forensic evidence if there is other corroborative evidence such as a confession, a witness, prior assaults ... etc. In this case you have no evidence period. That's the problem<<<

There were phases of the Chandra Levy investigation that were not done thoroughly, for what reasons I do not know. Perhaps 9/11 can be used as an excuse in that it drew law enforcement resources off into other directions from the mere Cnandra Levy investigation. Myself I don't think that 9/11 made much difference in the investigation, but perhaps it did.

From what we know Condit did not testify before the Grand Jury, but that was his right. On the other hand why was not Linda Zamsky Katz questioned by the grand jury? I do not think that we can say that there was no evidence there because there was evidence which could have been furnished by Linda Katz. How that evidence would have been assessed is another problem, but the problem was done away with by not questioning Linda Katz.

Likewise, should Otis Thomas have been questioned by the grand jury? This is not to imply which way the evidence presented by Thomas would have sent investigators. The point here is that all avenues of searching for evidence, and looking at evidence, were not used. Was Condit ever questioned about whether he had changed the locks on his apartment door or not? Why should that have been asked? Because Paul Katz, on a Larry King Live tv Show, said that the police knew and the Levys knew that Chandra had keys to Condit's apartment. Still Connie Chung did not ask Condit if Chandra had keys to his apartment.

This list goes on about what could have been looked at as evidence and ruled on one way or another. This is not to imply that all evidence would have pointed towards Condit. Some of it might have pointed in the opposite direction. To just ignore looking at everything does not solve anything, and it does not prove anything. The old Jack Webb, Dragnet tv series methods, of "Just the Facts Ma'am," seem to have been methods that worked. It found evidence that was important and eliminated evidence that was not important.

If we just look at the dna paternity test not taken in the Otis Thomas story we can see that Forensic evidence was overlooked, intentionally. A dna paternity test could have shown with 100% accuracy that Condit was not the father of the boy involved. That could not have hurt Condit at all. On the other hand we do not know now what the results of the dna paternity test would show, because the test was never made.

The FBI declared Otis Thomas a liar, or maybe they did, or maybe they did not. Otis Thomas is not reported as having had an attorney when he was questioned by the FBI, but Condit did have his attorney with him when questioned by the FBI. It would seem that a gardener preacher would be more in need of a lawyer when being questioned than an elected Congressman. At the very least Thomas would now have had a witness as to what questions were asked of him by the FBI.

And the FBI could not find Jennifer Thomas to question her. From what I read the FBI was requested by the Washington, D.C. police to question Otis Thomas and his daughter. Probably the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department could have done a better job than the FBI, but the Sheriff's Department was ran off by the D.C. Police from aiding in the investigation.

The Chandra Levy case does not look like a case where all evidence was investigated. The investigation has not proved anything, or disproved anything.

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



Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 630
Location: northern illinois

PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

>>> Condit got his 10K back. The initital reward fund was set up for the 'safe' return of missing Chandra Levy, so when they found her body, they did not have to pay anyone. <<<


sounds like a scam to me ... after all, we all know that he wasn't worried about her ever becoming 'safely returned', and i don't think even her remains would have been found if he hadn't been forced to move 'em once he ratted himself out around his midnight trip to luray, where i believe her body was originally hidden.

fwiw, rd, i think you should list out the many clues in your book, sort of in an outline form or such since we can't count on anyone thinking far enough outside the box to select them from the text, and send them to the enquirer specifically identified as clues to finding the killer. you probably won't hear a thing from them, but i certainly think your book contains more than enough investigative material to arrest and try chandra's murderer if anyone were willing to see the truth in this ugly picture ... it's not information we lack in gaining justice for chandra, it's the weak, wishy-washy will of the powers that be to do the right thing that's stopping the march of justice here and elsewhere.


nanci
_________________
the Truth has a name, and there is power in that Name!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rd



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

PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's an excellent idea, propia. I will do that and share with our research group where we can give it a once over and then send to the Enquirer and then others if we don't hear back from them.

I still think Condit's settlement has scared them. The only thing they've printed since then is that a mysterious DoD contractor was somehow unwittingly introduced to Chandra by Condit. Poor Condit.

We'll see if the Enquirer has any appetite left for investigative journalism that sells lots of papers.

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



Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 567

PostPosted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GREAT IDEA!!!!!!!!
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
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
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