View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002 Posts: 9275 Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What a bunch of clowns. They dropped the "threatening inmate witnesses" bunch of hooey that I have described as ignorant lies from day one.
And we find why the 70 letters listed as evidence wouldn't be shown to the defense lawyers. I knew all along that all of this stuff was made up, but didn't know the Keystone Kops were that involved in making it up. Should have known there's no low point these DC people can't go under.
And to think our taxes are being sucked into a black hole to pay for these lying shenanigans from our esteemed federal prosecutors.
They wouldn't know truth and justice if they ran into it.
As far as I can tell, they think this is a game and lying is like bluffing in poker.
Well, their bluff has been called, and they keep trying to keep from showing their losing hand.
It's all worth it to me if they are exposed as refusing to investigate Chandra's murder from the beginning when murder led into the halls of Congress.
rd
click to read the online true crime mystery novel Murder on a Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy
www.justiceforchandra.com home page |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sigsky
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 209 Location: South Carolina
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seems like the first signs that the prosecution case is falling apart before the trial even begins. The press seems to be giving this some exposure, but I haven't read anything in my local rag ( a McClatchy publication) or USA Today and I have seen nothing on National or Cable news. Not surprising. Trial is scheduled to start on Monday and I expect we will see some stories on Monday morning. You would think this would be a good weekend for an extensive special piece from one of the news channels ... the miners have been rescued, everyone is tired of campaigning, perfect timing.
Still no news about video coverage. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002 Posts: 9275 Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yeah, sigsky, I think there's a real aversion to being accused of hype like in 2001. And no congressman involved yet. If there are fireworks during the trial I'm sure it will hit everyone's radar.
For now it's a local DC story with special interest to Modesto, hence the great coverage by McClatchy News (Modesto and other area newspapers as well as nationwide).
Good point, sigsky. It'll be interesting to see if nationwide coverage picks up as the trial picks up, although like you say it's falling apart already and I have a hard time seeing these prosecutors picking things up with their motley crew of reluctant to answer questions prison inmates.
rd |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jane
Joined: 22 Sep 2002 Posts: 3227
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the Notice of Discovery the prosecution describes the Maria Lopez letter as being from Guandique to Maria, whereas the news article states that Guandique never replied to her.
http://media.myfoxdc.com/Documents/NoticeofFilingDiscoveryGuandique73009.pdf _________________ "There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sigsky
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 209 Location: South Carolina
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jane,
Nice catch! The notice shows several correspondences going back and forth and now we hear Guandique never responded? Very strange indeed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002 Posts: 9275 Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jane and sigsky, I'm wondering if anything at all from the DC prosecutors in the affadavit is the truth. I actually haven't seen anything resembling the truth yet.
In the Washington Post article by Keith Alexander on this, some new information.
- It was clarified that the DC prosecutors informed the defense lawyers about this recently, shortly before the rescheduled trial, which would not even be before the originally scheduled trial of October 4 that prosecution agreed needed to be delayed. I'm thinking they actually initiated the delay again like earlier this year.
One, they waited until the last minute to inform, but I'm wondering at this point whether they calculated the disclosure would cause a mistrial at best or another significant delay at worst. Like they don't really want to have to go to trial and have their affadavit lies examined in depth before a national audience of trial followers.
The judge put the kibosh on that and insisted the trial is going forward.
- The judge also ruled that Guandique's passed polygraph could not be admitted as evidence.
They lie about the lie detector test, they lie about everything to us and to Guandique, and they try to suppress actual facts such as Guandique passed his lie detector test and the "cellmate confession" inmate accusing him failed his.
I think that pretty much sums up this justice.
rd
D.C. police admit disguising selves, writing letters to Chandra Levy suspect
By Keith L. Alexander
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 14, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101406333.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sigsky
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 209 Location: South Carolina
|
Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
So it appears there was some communication between Guandique and "Maria Lopez", but Guandique didn't incriminate himself in the Levy murder in that correspondence. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jane
Joined: 22 Sep 2002 Posts: 3227
|
Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi sigsky - I'm still not sure. In the WP Keith Alexander said, "Guandique, 29, never acknowledged any involvement in Levy's slaying to the undercover officers posing as Maria Lopez."
The AP said, "...Guandique apparently never provided any incriminating statements to "Maria Lopez.""
But Mike Doyle said, "Guandique did not respond to the "Maria Lopez" correspondence, although it is unclear whether he saw through the detectives' ploy."
Doyle's reporting has been pretty accurate and he indicates that there was no response (although I suppose that could be taken different ways - no response at all as opposed to not the response the police were looking for.) _________________ "There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jane
Joined: 22 Sep 2002 Posts: 3227
|
Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
It does seem significant that the prosecution has "streamlined" its case - how much of their evidence is too shoddy to withstand the slightest scrutiny... _________________ "There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sigsky
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 209 Location: South Carolina
|
Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Jane,
Your guess is as good (probably better) than mine. That's part of why this case is so interesting, and a textbook on law enforcement in the District of Columbia. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sigsky
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 209 Location: South Carolina
|
Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:46 am Post subject: Levy Trial preview |
|
|
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-breaking-news/loris-am-buzz/-a-blustery-day-most.html
"Levy Trial preview. The trial of Ingmar Guandique, the man authorities believe killed federal intern Chandra Levy, is set to begin with jury selection on Monday. Levy disappeared while jogging in Rock Creek Park in 2001. Her case drew national attention, in part because she had been having an affair with then-Rep. Gary A. Condit (D-Calif.), who represented the district that includes her home town of Modesto. We'll have full coverage of the trial, including a story in this weekend's paper about the Levy family and their long journey to find justice for their daughter."
Good grief Lori! You call yourself a journalist. Maybe there are openings at the Enquirer. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jane
Joined: 22 Sep 2002 Posts: 3227
|
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
According to a Friday article in the Washington Times "....Mr. Condit was reportedly shopping a book manuscript in early 2009 to tell his side of the story, but his former agent said in an e-mail that he had decided not to pursue the idea. No record of a Condit memoir manuscript sale to date can be found...." _________________ "There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sigsky
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 Posts: 209 Location: South Carolina
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|