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 

Chapter 18. The Watch

 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Murder on a Horse Trail
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9235
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 8:43 am    Post subject: Chapter 18. The Watch Reply with quote



available from Amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com


Murder On A Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy
by Ralph Daugherty
iUniverse
ISBN: 0-595-31847-9


Murder on a Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy also available free to read online here on www.justiceforchandra.com



From a post:

There is a Mike Dayton at 719 Upland Place in Alexandria, Va 22314, area code 703.

It is between Route 7 and 236 just below where 420 intersects with 7. The major park in Alexandria is Chinquapin Park at 3210 King St., or Route 7. On the map it is just southeast of the intersection with 402 with Route 7.

Route 7 runs to I-395. If you were taking Condit from 719 Upland Place to Adams Morgan rather than going to work, you would take I-395 up rather than the shorter Route 400 drive to the capitol. Chinquapin Park is just over a mile from Dayton's on Route 7, the first stop after driving from Upland Place to the nearest highway and then heading for Condit's.

I am sure that is where the watch box was placed into a trash can, even though the police won't say.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9235
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Watch


The police were mollified. Chandra had been distraught, even obsessed, with the congressman. Who knows what she could have done? Maybe she just went away.

But what Condit thought should have went away, didn't. After seeing Condit in the news linked to a missing woman, after the FBI came to talk to her, and after being told by Condit not to talk to them, Anne Marie was scared. She told friends she wasn't going on any long trips and wasn't suicidal, so if she disappeared, that wasn't the cause. But at some point, she decided that only going public would make her feel safe from disappearing with her secrets.

She went public with what Helen Kennedy calls a "blockbuster interview" with Rita Cosby of Fox News. Kennedy of the New York Daily News quotes:

Smith, a United Airlines flight attendant, said she
went public because she fears for her life.

"I was concerned about my safety," she told Fox News
in a blockbuster interview. "This person doesn't
want this relationship exposed. By my telling the
story, setting it straight, telling the truth - I'll
be much safer." [1]


Jim Robinson, a lawyer friend from her home town of Seattle, agreed to represent her pro bono. Anne Marie started being followed and getting strange calls and had to move out of her San Francisco apartment after she wouldn't sign this affadavit sent to Robinson by an investigator for Condit's lawyer:

I, ANN MARIE SMITH, declare:

1. I am Ann Marie Smith, a flight attendant based in
the San Francisco Bay area.

2. I regularly fly to the Washington, D.C., area as
part of my job.

3. During the course of my employment I have become
acquainted with Gary A. Condit, a U.S. congressman
who is a frequent flier from San Francisco to
Washington, D.C.

4. In addition to Congressman Condit, I also have
become acquainted with other elected officials and
their numerous staff members who travel weekly to
the nation's capital.

5. I do not and have not had a relationship with
Congressman Condit other than being acquainted with
him. I do not and have not had a romantic
relationship with Congressman Condit.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of
the United States of America that the foregoing is
true and correct.

Ann Marie Smith [2]


After talking to the FBI and D.C. police for hours, investigators learned among other things from her that Condit drove a car, a red Ford, kept by an aide. They located it as a car kept by Dayton and searched it for clues to Chandra's disappearance, but found nothing.

Possibly emboldened by Anne Marie, and against the advice of the Levy's lawyer, Billy Martin, as well as against the request of the police, Linda Zamsky, the "unnamed relative" of the last few weeks, also went public with her charges against Condit. She released a 15 page statement detailing what Chandra had told her about her relationship with Condit, information that Zamsky had provided police and the FBI from the beginning.

Hervey Pean of Cox News Service quotes from it:

Levy had "described, in detail, some of their
bedroom encounters," the aunt, Linda Zamsky, said in
the statement.

"The Levy family is frustrated and outraged that
Congressman Gary Condit and his associates have
mischaracterized Chandra Levy's relationship with
the congressman," Zamsky said in the statement.
"From my many conversations with her, it was clear,
without a doubt, that they were involved in an
intimate relationship."

"Chandra's family feels strongly that everyone,
including Rep. Condit, who was close to Chandra must
cooperate fully with the investigation so that she
can be found," Zamsky's statement read. "We believe
that Rep. Condit's lack of candor is hindering
efforts to find Chandra. We call on him to do what
he would want others to do if one of his children
were missing -- give a complete account of his
relationship with Chandra, what he knows about her
whereabouts on the days leading up to her
disappearance and any information he may have that
can help investigators." [3]


Linda Zamsky knew Chandra wasn't distraught and obsessed, she had received an upbeat message of "big news" from Chandra just before she disappeared. And yet, behind the scenes, Chandra was being victimized yet again, forcing the Levys after two months to confront not only Condit's misportrayal of Chandra but the resulting police inaction as well.

The Levys would receive some criticism for it. How could they talk about their daughter's immoral behavior, nay, not just talk about it, but insist that Condit talk about it?

How shortsighted the criticism. The point wasn't yes, Chandra may be missing, but she was in love when she disappeared, and we insist you admit to the affair rather than deny it, the point was, as Allan Lengel of the Washington Post writes:

Police searching for a missing person generally
focus on those who were closest to the individual,
attempting to establish frame of mind, habits and
behavior before the disappearance.

In cases involving women who vanish, police pay
particular attention to the person or persons with
whom they were last known to be having a sexual
relationship. [4]


The police responded to these public exposures from Anne Marie Smith and Linda Zamsky, as the Washington Post reports:

District police are still hoping for a fuller
account from Rep. Gary A. Condit, who has had two
interviews with investigators but has not clarified
the nature of his relationship with missing intern
Chandra Levy, a senior police official said
yesterday.

"We need more clarity in his relationship with
Chandra and anything else he and others can add to
her state of mind and lifestyle," said Terrance W.
Gainer, the executive assistant police chief and the
second highest-ranking officer in the department.

"It is not scheduled right now, but we would like
another one with him," Gainer said, referring to a
third interview. "Clearly we have an interest in
doing that." [5]


Condit all of a sudden found time to meet with the police, that night even, when Zamsky revealed details of his relationship with Chandra that must have shaken him to the roots. As Petula Dvorak of the Washington Post reports:

The congressman was interviewed by police for a
third time Friday night, and two sources familiar
with the 90-minute meeting said Condit - who is
married and has two grown children - reversed a
denial that his aides had maintained since soon
after the intern went missing after April 30.
[6]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9235
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Newsweek reports that Condit told investigators in the interview following Zamsky's public statement that he "had a long-term sexual relationship with Chandra Levy". Michael Isikoff of Newsweek also added that Condit told the police there was no break in their relationship and that he had a final, routine phone call with her on Sunday, April 29.

He would later describe this publically as a one minute call to return her message, a routine call where he asked her if she had got her train ticket yet. Talk of a distraught Chandra who he told to go home and wouldn't return her calls had disappeared, just as she had.

The difference? Once he was linked romantically with Chandra, as he should have been from day one, any indications of emotional problems point to him. Once linked, his story changes. Which story to believe? The Levys wanted a lie detector test.

Inexplicably, reporters asked police if these revelations would give the police an excuse to search Condit's apartment. Just what the reporters who asked this think the police might find in Condit's apartment is puzzling.

Blood? Condit might have bludgeoned Chandra in his apartment and disposed of her as trash, while his wife was visiting?

True, Carolyn Condit was at the Washington Hilton Tuesday afternoon when Chandra disappeared, helping prepare for the First Lady's Luncheon to be held the next day for congressional wives. But why reporters would think that Condit might invite Chandra to his apartment for a delightful afternoon before his wife returned, much less leave traces of blood in his apartment in the process, is difficult to fathom. More likely traces of perfume would lead to traces of blood, and it wouldn't be Chandra's.

Still, given the unexpected revelations, Condit was in full damage control mode. The police could search his apartment if they "thought it was helpful." [7] A late night search was arranged for Tuesday, July 10.

But a funny thing happened on the way to his apartment to meet the police. A man, well let's let him tell it, to Paula Zahn on Fox News The Edge:

ZAHN: Welcome, sir. Good to have you with us.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good to be here, Paula.

ZAHN: If you would, can you take us back to the day
that you spotted Gary Condit near the trash can
we're seeing on the air here?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Certainly.

ZAHN: What did you see?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was in a car driving behind a
black Volkswagen. The black Volkswagen pulled over
to the side of the road right at the corner. I
couldn't tell whether or not it was going to turn
right or if it was trying to park. And at that
moment, a passenger got out, it was a man. He turned
and looked at me, and I recognized him immediately
from the media coverage as Gary Condit.

ZAHN: Now did he seem startled that you were looking
him in the eye?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I don't think startled. He
definitely was not happy. He looked at me and then
just took a few steps. He didn't look back. Took a
few steps over to the garbage can, reached his hand
in. And then after he put his hand in the garbage
can, looked back at me with a scowling look on his
face and got back into the car.

ZAHN: But at no point did he say anything to you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He did not....

ZAHN: How close would you say you actually got to
the congressman?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would say about 15 feet away.

ZAHN: And were you able to make out who was driving
the car? Can you describe him for us or her for us
this evening?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I -- all I could see through the
window of the car, the rear window was it looked
like short hair. It looked like a man driving but I
couldn't -- I didn't get a good look at him. I was
surprised enough to see the congressman in that
neighborhood in Alexandria.

ZAHN: And when the congressman got back in the car
and you're trying to figure out what you just
witnessed, what went through your mind, because you
had been following this story pretty closely, right?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I had. I just immediately
thought: I wonder what he threw away, you know. I
wonder -- he didn't just toss whatever it was into
the garbage can like a wrapper or something. He
reached his arm in, and I thought, that was
interesting. So I immediately ran over to the
garbage can to see if there was anything unusual in
it.

ZAHN: And what did you find?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I found a cardboard box for a
watch. It was actually torn into little pieces about
four-inch square pieces and the watch -- the
manuals, warranty information, all of that for a
watch.

ZAHN: And when you made this discovery, what went
through your mind? What were you thinking?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I just -- I thought it was --
that was an interesting thing to have in a public
garbage can on a street corner. I didn't know that
that was exactly what the congressman had thrown
away, but it was definitely unusual. I didn't really
think very much of it until the next morning when I
heard on the media report that his apartment had
been searched the night before and talked to a
police friend of mine who encouraged me to call,
said something like that could be a big deal....

ZAHN: All right, and one last question for you. Once
you reported this to local police, is it your
understanding they in turn called the D.C. police?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I reported it to the D.C. police.
I work in the District and so I reported to them.
And then they -- I talked directly with them, and
they were the ones who actually went to the trash
can and retrieved the box.

ZAHN: And did they give you any kind of reaction to
your discovery? Did they say that this was relevant
to the investigation, interesting, important?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They told me that, actually, it
doesn't -- it seemed to have anything to do with the
disappearance of Chandra Levy, which is where
they're focusing most of their attention, that it
might come into play in other investigations, and
you know, I might be contacted in the future about
those.

ZAHN: And you expect to be contacted. I know the
U.S. attorney's office called to thank you for your
cooperation. Do you expect to be questioned by them?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They said they might contact me
with -- you know, in a few months, two or three
months they might get back to me. But they're also
working on finding Chandra. That's definitely first
in their minds right now.... [8]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9235
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

With the police coming to search his apartment, Condit tore a cardboard box for a watch into the the side and bottom pieces to flatten it and threw it away in a trash can in a park, along with the manual and warranty card that had been in the box. Except he didn't toss it as one normally would. He reached into the trash can and placed it in the trash can so suspiciously that a man driving into the park to walk his dog thought he'd better check what it was once he recognized the man as Condit.

When he checked, he saw something unusual. He didn't know that Condit had placed the torn down watch box and manual in the trash can, he just noticed that was an unusual thing to be in the trash can when he looked. And he did notice it just laying there in the trash in view, as he notes. Then he went home.

It wasn't until he saw on the news the next morning that Condit's apartment had been searched overnight that he thought he'd better tell someone, and then it was only to call a policeman friend, who advised him to call the police. So even though this happened a few hours before the police searched Condit's apartment, they did not know about it as they searched. D.C. police came and found the watch box still in the trash can the next morning.

Tom Squitieri of USA Today reports what they found:

Authorities have indicated that among other things,
they want to ask Condit why he allegedly discarded a
watchcase in a trash can in Alexandria, Va., just
hours before police searched his apartment July 10.
The case was traced to a Tag Heuer watch given to
Condit by a 29-year-old San Francisco woman who was
on his staff during the mid-1990s. [9]

It was the box, manual, and warranty card for an over $400 Tag Heuer watch that Joleen McKay had given Condit in 1996 just before they broke up. Several news reports such as USA Today's above referred to it as a watch case rather than a watch box, which was confusing because Tag Heuer watches come in a nice zippered leather case inside the box. This was the cardboard box, torn down, in which a leather case enclosed watch would be sold along with the manual and warranty card. The Tag Heuer watch and leather case were not with the box and manual in the trash can.

Joleen was the former Condit girlfriend who went to the FBI as soon as she saw Chandra in the news linked to Condit. She also called Dayton a few times to encourage him to get Condit to cooperate with the police. She apparently didn't believe the "good friend" statement Condit issued, as OC Thomas says his daughter Jennifer didn't either. They know him so well.

So he was throwing away a gift box from a girlfriend given to him five years earlier. What's the big deal?

Many people were rightfully concerned about obstruction of justice. The New York Daily News reports that "One investigator was quoted as saying the watch case may have no bearing on the Levy case, but its disposal 'shows a pattern of deceit.'" What else might he have thrown away before they searched his apartment?

Well, that's the silliness of a voluntary search of his apartment two and half months after Chandra disappeared. One would have to expect that he would throw out anything he didn't want the police to see before a scheduled search. If there ever was cause to search, such as Joleen McKay calling the D.C. police and urging them to search his apartment, which is what she did as soon as it hit the news, then that is the time to search. But if there wasn't probable cause then, there certainly wasn't two and a half months later after he cleaned out his apartment.

The police were counting on the infallibility of detecting blood, no matter how minute, if it had ever been there. True, but the concept of a bloodily murdered Chandra in his apartment, accidental or otherwise, and then somehow disposing of her in his dumpster or sneaking her body out of his apartment building is, to put it tactfully, not probable.

Instead, this was a public relations exercise. Condit had admitted to an affair. A public search of his apartment, a lie detector test, and everyone could go on about their business. Condit could be cleared and resume his public life. The press could focus on other questions and life would go on.

But it just wouldn't go away that easily. The watch that had come in the watch box was given to him by a former staffer, hardly a reason to be afraid to throw it away in his own trash either at home or at the Rayburn Building, where the staffer and he had worked and where he would say that he had it. How could a cardboard watch box with a manual and warranty card arouse suspicion, even if it was found to be a gift from a staffer from five years ago?

Vince Flammini remembers when she gave it to him. He tells Geraldo Rivera:

RIVERA: She's the one that got him the watch?

Mr. FLAMMINI: She's the one that got him the watch,
and I remember when he got--when she got it for him.
He was upset because he don't wear watches. [10]


Condit knew Joleen had called Dayton a few times. He didn't know the police and FBI had talked to her. He could be trying to erase any evidence that they had ever been close should the police ask him. Still, the real question is, why did he have a five year old watch box with manual and warranty card, either at home or in his office?

How big a Congressional office and apartment would a representative need to keep such things as empty cardboard watch boxes sitting for five years after they get it? Wherever the box was, it must have held the watch until recently. Otherwise, why would someone keep an empty watch box for five years?

It had been posted on the internet that the reason people hold on to Tag Heuer watchboxes, other than their being status symbols, is that the box enhances the value of the watch as a collector's item, as well as its re-sale value. It's a way of authenticating it. The post said that there are hundreds being offered for sale on the net, and many of the ads refer to the "original presentation box."

It might make a difference in sale price, and also makes it suitable for re-giving as a gift, depending on whether the watch had been worn more than a few times. But by whom? Condit was upset to even get it as a gift. Yet he had the watch box it came in five years later. Where was the watch?

Why haven't the police released the serial number? Perhaps the watch box, warranty card, and the store where Joleen bought it don't have the serial number and the police have no Tag Heuer serial number to look for. There was no announcement of an alert to pawnshops as there was for Chandra's ring when Chandra was found. Wouldn't an announcement like that be critical to finding the watch?

Or do the police know where the watch is? You would think that if Condit had the watch, there would be some comment along the lines that he threw out the box but kept the watch. Strange.

Someone else must have the watch, and it would appear they got it not that long before Chandra disappeared, otherwise Condit held onto an empty watch box in his tiny Congressional office or apartment after giving the watch to someone months or years earlier. To whom, and why didn't he give the box, manual, and warranty card with it?

Condit did something else strange besides throw a watch box in an Alexandria, Virginia park trash can just before police searched his apartment. For some reason, he explains that he threw it away in a french fries box. Judy Bachrach of Vanity Fair tells Larry King:

KING: What about mystery of dumping the watch in
Alexandria, Virginia -- nowhere near where he lives?

BACHRACH: Well, he dumped...

KING: The watch box.

BACHRACH: ...the watch box, I was told by a very
good friend of his, in a package of McDonald's
french fries. He had gone out to buy a hamburger and
french fries for his wife Carolyn and he then drove
with an aide to Virginia, and dumped that watchbox
inside a package of McDonald's french fries and then
threw it in trash. [11]


A week later, his daughter Cadee told Larry King:

KING: What did you make of the missing watch box?

CONDIT: Well.

KING: I mean how do you piece together that story?
It is a strange story.

CONDIT: It is a strange story, and the only thing I
can say with the watch box is there were French
fries involved.

KING: There were?

CONDIT: Yes.

KING: Well, I don't know anybody who drives that far
to drop off French fries in a box.

CONDIT: Knowing at the same time that Mike Dayton,
they had been to his house, it wasn't like they
drove out of town just to throw something away. They
were in that town.

KING: He was with Mike, and Mike was out with Gary.
In other words, he didn't take a box from a room,
and say "let's drive seven miles."

CONDIT: No, and he didn't take anything from his
apartment either. This is from his office. He never
took anything from his apartment. [12]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9235
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Half a year later, it changed to Five Guys restaurant and the reference to being in a french fries box was dropped, but the concept of going for fast food remained the same, as Condit tells Larry King:

KING: We'll be taking calls for Gary Condit. And it
must be -- I think the thing that may have hurt you
the most in all this was why you took a gift of a
watch to another city to throw it away. What
happened?

(LAUGHTER)

GARY CONDIT: Oh, that watch box thing.

KING: What happened?...

GARY CONDIT: Well, actually, you know, the watch box
had nothing to do with Chandra. I mean, I cleaned
out my desk and the tabloids were going through all
my trash. As they may go through your trash from
time to time. So I threw it in a trash can. I didn't
drive somewhere particular to throw it away. I just
-- the first trash can that came along, I threw it
in a trash can with some garbage. And we stopped, as
a matter of fact, my wife was in Washington, we
stopped at Five Guys restaurant, we got some food to
take home. Me and another gentleman and we were
taking it home and I said pull over, I'm going to
throw this trash away. And I threw it away, and
Larry --

KING: Your wife was with you?

GARY CONDIT: No, she wasn't with me. Another
gentleman was with me. As soon as I threw it in the
garbage can, it wasn't a dumpster or anything. It
was just a garbage can on the street. There was a
guy who ran up beside my car and dove in the garbage
can. I could see his legs hanging out. Now, he was
with the tabloids. That watch box story came from
the tabloids.

KING: Did the watch have any meaning?

GARY CONDIT: None.

KING: It was a gift from a friend -- a girlfriend?

GARY CONDIT: It just -- it had no meaning. It was
just in my desk. In congress when you move from
office to office, one of the things that goes with
you from every office you move into, as you move
around offices is your desk. So, you know, I never
cleaned my desk out, But what I did, Larry, was I
cleaned my desk out simply because I knew people
were going through -- you know -- they wanted
photographs of my family. I cleared all the family
photos out, all the letters that I had from -- you
know -- both presidents, from Bush -- President
Bush, President Clinton, Al Gore. All those people I
had in my desk, I took everything out, put them in a
file under lock and key. Because I just didn't want
the tabloids to end up with those letter. So -- and
I saw them going through my garbage at my -- where I
live in Washington, D.C. I mean, I actually saw them
talk to the garbage men about going through my
garbage. So that's what that was about, it had
nothing to do with anything. [13]


It is puzzling what putting the box in a french fries holder was supposed to be about, especially since he didn't do it. The man who looked in the trash can just saw the torn down watch box and manual laying in the trash, not buried or hidden within other trash. And it appears that Condit has changed to Five Guys from McDonalds to explain driving to Alexandria for some fast food. There are two Five Guys restaurants in Alexandria.

But it was more complicated than that. Condit didn't just drive out for some fast food for him and his wife with an aide. The New York Post and the Washington Post report that Dayton was the aide that was driving Condit when he was seen in the Alexandria park. Dayton lived in Alexandria, on Upland Place just off Route 7, or King St., the main east-west drag through Alexandria.

The major park in Alexandria is Chinquapin Park at 3210 King St. King St. runs to I-395, and there is a Five Guys there. Chinquapin Park is about a mile from Dayton's Alexandria home towards I-395 and a Five Guys restaurant.

If you were taking Condit from Alexandria to Adams Morgan to, say, get his apartment searched, you would take I-395 up. And a mile up Route 7 from Dayton's house you stop at the park and throw away something. There would be no food involved yet. That would be when you get to I-395 and stop at Five Guys on the way north.

Now it is entirely possible that the empty box was in Condit's office for five years, and that he chose to clean out his office when his apartment was to be searched, and took the box with him all the way to Dayton's house, then stopped at a Five Guys restaurant to get a burger and fries, and on his way home stopped at a park to throw it away.

I think instead it's a whopper.

It's more probable that they got the watch box from Dayton's house to throw it away. There would have been more room there to store it, and Dayton used to date Joleen. But either way, the only conclusion one can draw is that Condit did not expect to see the watch again.

Garance Franke-Ruta writes in Washington City Paper:

While 13 TV-news cameras train their sights on
Democratic California Rep. Gary Condit's condo
building on the night of July 10, waiting for the
congressman to come home so the police can search
his apartment, 15 of Condit's neighbors gather on
the stoop of 2611 Adams Mill Road, clutching
cigarettes and red plastic cups filled with beer.

When the haggard but smiling congressman finally
arrives home, around 8:40 p.m., Troy, who lives on
the second floor, bounds up the steps to open the
door, walks him down the hall toward the elevator,
and then returns to shoo reporters away. [14]


The haggard but smiling congressman finally arrived home, minus a watch box. Mission accomplished.

Police entered his apartment to search for "blood, hair, telltale signs of a struggle" at 11:30 pm. [15] ABC News reported later that no forensic evidence turned up to help find Chandra.

The next day police tried to put Condit's role in Chandra's disappearance to rest. They asked Condit to take an FBI-administered polygraph. Helen Kennedy of the New York Daily News quotes Chief Ramsey: "It's in the best interests of everyone concerned to answer the questions," Ramsey said. "He wants to put this to rest as much as we do."

But Condit was trying to limit what he would answer. Ramsey told Kennedy: "If we can't have an interview in which we can ask the questions we want to ask, there's no point in doing it," said Police Chief Charles Ramsey.

Apparently there wasn't. Condit's lawyer Abbe Lowell announced that Condit had passed a privately administered polygraph. Bob Dart of Cox News Service reports:

His attorney announced that Condit had taken and
passed a lie detector test answering the "only
questions that matter." He said these were whether
Condit knows where Levy is, whether he ever harmed
her or had anyone else harm her, and whether he has
anything to do with her disappearance. [16]

The D.C. police expressed their surprise and disappointment. From the Washington Post:

"My impression was that we were going to continue
that dialogue. I took him at his word," Executive
Assistant Police Chief Terrance W. Gainer said of
the negotiations with Lowell. "I just didn't expect
it quite this way." [17]

CNN reports more of what the police had to say:

"I'm not happy with how they did it. I don't know
how an examiner could possibly give an exam like
that without knowing all the facts in the case,"
Ramsey said. "They didn't ask us; in fact, they
misled us into believing it was somehow going to be
a cooperative effort. That didn't happen."

"We were told that the congressman was busy,
attending sessions, things of that nature," he said.
"Obviously that wasn't true, so we would just like
everybody to be up front and honest and if you're
going to do a private exam, just say so." [18]


Condit had paid an ex-FBI polygraph consultant, Barry Colvert, $1,031 to ask him three questions. Colvert passed him. In contrast, consider what a real lie detector test entails. Elizabeth Smart's father was asked to take one, and like most people except silent Modesto men Gary Condit and Scott Peterson, he of course agreed. Elizabeth's uncle, Tom Smart, describes what her father went through to Nancy Grace on Larry King Live:

GRACE: A lot of focus has been placed on your
brother, Edward Smart. We all know he's taken a
polygraph. What was his response to that?

SMART: He said it was four hours of hell. And he's
willing to go do a polygraph. He didn't know that --
he didn't volunteer that. But somehow a polygraph --
something got out and I said, "Ed what about a
polygraph?" And he just went, yes I've been through
four hours of hell -- and whatever.

The entire family is willing to take polygraphs.
We'll do whatever you want. I don't know who has and
who hasn't. But the family's -- the family will do
anything. Just...

GRACE: I'm trying to imagine my own dad strapped to
a polygraph for four hours trying to answer
questions, the whole time, wondering where the heck
his daughter is, you know, taken in the middle of
the night. Did he pass the polygraph?

SMART: Yes. I was told that he passed the polygraph.
When you do a polygraph, and I know because I've
done one just recently -- I should never say that...
[19]


Four hours of hell. That's what the police would have needed to stress Condit to see if he was telling the truth. Not three pre-arranged questions, four hours of hell, if it was worth doing, which by arranging for a private one seems to be the case.

The police wanted to polygraph Condit when they knew he had pitched the watch box just before his apartment was searched but he didn't know that they knew. They reluctantly revealed this information after he arranged for Barry Colvert to ask him three general questions shortly after his apartment was searched. When Condit's lawyer announced this and that they would not take the police test, the police could no longer use this as a question that would have tested Condit's truthfulness and established a baseline to compare to other detailed questions about May 1.

Helen Kennedy reports:

Ramsey said he also has questions about the
congressman's alibi.

"It could just be a mistake, but it could be
something more than that," Ramsey said. "If we're
going to have a polygraph examination, those are the
kinds of issues that we need to kind of lock down."
[20]


The irony is that if Condit had lied as expected if he were asked about throwing away evidence, they would have a non-trivial lie to compare to his answers about Chandra. Answers about not knowing anything about Chandra's disappearance could have been determined to be truthful with a high degree of assurance because they would have a known lie to compare to it.

Of course, he may have even told the truth about that as well. No one will ever know. Condit chose not to go through that particular hell.

For some reason, everyone else but Condit did.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9235
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Next chapter - Exposed
http://www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2542

Murder on a Horse Trail - Table of Contents
http://www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2562


The Watch
1. Kennedy, Helen. “She Claims Affair With Pol: Flight attendant says Condit
wanted her to lie, stall FBI.” New York Daily News 3 July 2001.

2. Ibid.

3. Pean, Hervey. “Missing intern’s aunt asks Rep. Condit for full account.” Cox
News Service 7 July 2001.

4. Lengel, Allan and Petula Dvorak. “Aunt Linda Details Chandra’s Affair with
Gary.” Washington Post 6 July 2001.

5. Lengel, Alan and Petula Dvorak. “Police Want to Talk With Condit Again.”
Washington Post 7 July 2001.

6. Dvorak, Petula and Allan Legel. “Levy Family Seeks Condit Polygraph.”
Washington Post 9 July 2001.

7. Burger, Timothy J. “Kin: Give Condit Lie Detector.” New York Daily News 9
July 2001.

8. “Man who claims he saw Condit dump a watch case.” Interview with Paula
Zahn. The Edge. Fox News. 25 July 2001. Transcript.

9. Squitieri, Tom and Kevin Johnson. “Investigators reportedly focus on Condit
staffers.” USA Today 25 July 2001.

10. Flammini, Vince, George Lewis, Ed Rollins, Julian Epstein, Wendy Murphy,
Candice DeLong, Don Vance, Dominick Dunne. “Backfiring of Congressman
Gary Condit’s media blitz.” Rivera Live. CNBC. 27 Aug. 2001.

11. Larry King Live. “Panelists Discuss Gary Condit’s Interview With ‘Vanity
Fair’.” 23 August 2001. Transcript.

12. Condit, Cadee. Interview with Larry King. Larry King Live. CNN. 5 Sept.
2001. Transcript.

13. Condit, Gary. Interview with Larry King. Larry King Live. CNN. 25 Feb.
2002. Transcript.

14. Franke-Ruta, Garance. “THE NEIGHBORS, THE HANGERS-ON, AND
THE CREEPY WOODS.” Washington City Paper 20 July 2001.

15. Kennedy, Helen. “Cops Comb Condit’s Apartment.” New York Daily News
11 July 2001.

16. Dart, Bob. “Levy Visited Condit-Related Sites Just Before Vanishing.” Cox
News 19 July 2001.

17. Lengel, Allan and Petula Dvorak. “Condit Passes Private Polygraph Lawyer
Says.” Washington Post 14 July 2001.

18. “Police scour D.C. park in Levy search.” CNN 17 July 2001.

19. “Expert Panel Discusses Elizabeth Smart Case.” Interview with Larry King.
Larry King Live. CNN. 12 June 2002. Transcript.

20. Kennedy, Helen. “Cops on Intern Net Trail: Computer shows Levy may
have been lured to path.” New York Daily News 16 July 2001.

Burger, Timothy J. and Helen Kennedy. “Police hunt for Chandra’s body; Condit
balking at taking lie test.” New York Daily News 13 July 2001.

“Campaign Finance Reports and Data” at http://www.fec.gov , 5 Sep. 2002.

Doyle, Michael. “Condit aide denies cover-up: He says he never tried to stop a
woman from disclosing alleged affair.” Modesto Bee 27 July 2001.

Dvorak, Petula and Allan Lengel. “D.C. Police Question Condit For A 4th
Time.” Washington Post 27 July 2001.

Isikoff, Michael. “The Battle Over Chandra.” Newsweek 23 July 2001

Isikoff, Michael. “The Story Changes.” Newsweek 7 July 2001.

Lathem, Niles and Cathy Burke. “Condit Wife’s Mystery Phone Call.” New
York Post 27 July 2001.

Lengel, Allan and Petula Dvorak. “Woman Says Condit Asked Her to Lie.”
Washington Post 3 July 2001.

“Levy Aunt Speaks.” ABC News 2 Aug. 2001.

“Newsweek, NBC confirm Levy affair.” MSNBC Washington 7 July 2001.

“Police Seek Condit Phone Records.” ABC News 6 July 2001.

“‘Significant’ chance Levy won’t be found.” USA Today 19 July 2001.

Sisk, Richard and Leo Standora. “Pol Threw Out Watch Case.” New York Daily
News 20 July 2001.

“The Heat Goes On: The Levy team uses the media spotlight to keep Chandra’s
case from going cold.” CNN 23 July 2001.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Murder on a Horse Trail 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