 |
www.justiceforchandra.com
Justice for Chandra Levy and missing women
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9274
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:53 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| lector wrote: | From the Orlando Sentinel:
| Quote: | | Prosecutors must show that no one else could have murdered Caylee other than her mother. If Anthony's attorneys can raise the idea that another person with motive, means and opportunity committed the killing, they are building the argument that the state failed to do its job. |
Apply those requirements to the Guandique case & what do you get.
I would think that the DC prosecutors have a tough road ahead, though Guandique looks to be a pretty unsympathetic defendant. I wonder if they'll be allowed to use his subsequent crimes as evidence. I didn't think that was normally allowed but who knows. Of course trying to find a DC jury who doesn't know something about his history..... where does that lead you? This is all going to be interesting. |
well, that's reasonable doubt. Since we are in circumstantial case territory, certainly I believe a much stronger circumstantial case can be made against Condit than Guandique, and that case should be made as reasonable doubt.
But that's not enough alone. Guandique's case must also be shown as the unreasonable case that it is. That starts with requiring the prosecution to place the victim at the scene. They will do that with some lady who claims she saw Chandra jogging somewhere there in Rock Creek Park around that day of May 1, a "reasonable" establishment of her presence there.
I'm sure the lady is well intentioned, but it goes way beyond thinking she saw a short dark curly haired woman jogging in the park. Leggings and a USC sweatshirt? Right. I would say make the well intentioned lady do the same as she claims she saw until she comes to her senses or loses her senses, whichever comes first.
But that's nitpicking. If anyone thinks the defense is going to deal with Chandra anywhere out there on Western Ridge horse trail or branches of it such as between Beach and Ridge unless some lady can be shown as paid off or something, nope, sorry.
Every aspect of Chandra's life and behavior in the days prior to her disappearance needs to be examined and prosecution challenged to explain how a highly trained women's evangelist for safety and security, an FBI applicant who minored in criminal law and previously worked for the Modesto Police Department, who never jogged outdoors and was constantly monitoring with her cell phone for calls from Condit to her answering machine when not at her apartment, especially the day before she disappeared, all of a sudden disappeared without her cell phone, without Mace protection spray she always carried, and allegedly on a jog from Dupont Circle to Grove 18 on Ridge Road that not one sane woman making this claim would do themselves.
In other words, prosecution is presenting Condit's original story to the police that Chandra was an obsessed stalker who became suicidal when he refused to take her calls. However he changed that story eight or nine times and never returned to it once it was established that she was one of his mistresses, in her eyes, his girlfriend and wife as soon as he divorced his terminally ill wife.
Because you could present what Chandra did as suicidal, no longer caring to be in touch with Condit, hoping her death made him regret rejecting her stalking, but that's the only way you could make the Guandique circumstantial case.
Good luck with that, prosecution. Condit's circumstantial case is instead not only believable, it's compelling, something you'll wish for somewhere as you muck around with those prison informant stories.
I would also examine closely why the police said her 14k bracelet recently given to her by Condit was missing (we have a quote from the DC Police spokesman saying that, contrary to the Washington Post lies) and how no one including her family and representatives in Washington all these years saw the bracelet in her belongings until the Washington Post reporters claim they found it in her belongings, and just how it was the Washington Post could be examining her belongings seven years later that were not returned to her family or allowed to be examined by her family to ascertain what was there as the Washington Post claims they did.
The bracelet was the subject of a great deal of news coverage at the time, and the DC Police specifically were asked about and specifically said they couldn't find it, and until there's a believable explanation from this motley crew in DC, which quite frankly I don't believe these DC Police and Washington Post reporters involved in that series last year any more than I believe any one of Condit's nine versions of Chandra's disappearance, then Chandra was wearing her 14k bracelet from Condit when she disappeared.
Note that the 14k bracelet gift must be found to have been in her apartment to make the claim of this jog to her death instead of meeting Condit, and wouldn't you know it was found just a few months before the DC Police charged Guandique, allegedly by a Washington Post reporter writing a book on Guandique's soon to be conviction even as we speak.
I would also challenge prosecution to explain why Chandra's body being dumped in Rock Creek Park as every other murdered person found has been rather than this unbelievable contention that Chandra placed herself there against every convention of her life. Any normal person would start with Chandra being driven there as the explanation.
The only problem for DC is, the only person in these circumstantial cases with a strong motive and no alibi who had a car was Condit.
rd |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lector
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Will the defense even have to bring up detailed alternative theories to establish reasonable doubt?
This will depend on the prosecution's case, of course, but maybe all that the defense will need to do is hammer away at the lack of concrete evidence that Chandra was killed in that spot on the day she disappeared. That might even be an easier sell to a jury than a specific theory naming another possible suspect.
I suppose that'll be a tactical decision they'lll have to make after the prosecution presents its case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9274
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It would be a mistake just to say prosecution didn't have any physical evidence that Guandique did it, and hope the jury agrees the circumstantial case was not strong enough.
There is more of a reasonable doubt than we don't have any evidence Guandique did it besides prison inmate stories. Chandra's life must be examined and the jury understand the circumstances of her life, to understand the circumstantial evidence of her death.
rd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lector
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good point. For me, the apparent lack of physical evidence would be enough for reasonable doubt, but I can't assume that everyone thinks like I do.
I still think that the defense can establish how unlikely it'd be for Chandra to be in that place w/o bringing Condit into the picture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9274
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That she was in in constant phone contact via checking her answering machine by cell phone is a big part of the unlikelihood, I would say impossibility, of Chandra being off on a jog to Rock Creek Park.
Many more reasons, but that's a very big part of her life and behavior prior to disappearing.
It is also important to pound on the DC Police post-find comments that were a consensus that her remains were that of a dumped and hidden body that were apparently swept aside under political pressure when there was only one person with motive, ability, and no alibi to put her there, that being a congressman, Condit.
So that it is such a large part of her life that includes Condit that it would take compelling information to place her there of her own accord without a cell phone, without protection, without much of anything, against every convention and practice of her life, wearing Victoria's Secrets panties for gods sakes and until explained to my satisfaction her 14k bracelet gift from Condit, when those knowing her life would universally conclude the only way she was there was brought there.
Also critical to understanding Chandra in the context of Condit is that, yes, she clicked on something that brought up Rock Creek Park map with Klingle Mansion address (a featureless green blob of a map), but that was in conjunction of spending the entire morning searching on infomation about Condit.
The prosecution will contend that she switched gears and since it was "a nice day for a jog" she searched on Rock Creek Park.
Again, why isn't the presumption that having spent the rest of the morning searching on Condit, that the search on Rock Creek Park wasn't also related to Condit? She did log off her computer ten minutes after Condit left VP Cheney's office for a meeting he requested the day before, to discuss nothing of substance, and was not heard of again until 6:30 that evening.
Why would the presumption not be that Condit intended to spend the afternoon with Chandra and mentioned Rock Creek Park?
It would take compelling information to believe otherwise.
Chandra also had told her landlord she would know on Wednesday, the day after she disappeared, about leaving her apartment, and she also didn't have transportation to her graduation the following week in California arranged, where Condit had provided air fare the prior December for her finals, and it is more than reasonable, compelling I would say, to conclude that she was seeking answers on both of those subjects and more from Condit.
If a jury is to care enough about her death to care about her life, they will know that.
rd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
