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 

Going Back to the Time/Scene of the Crime of the Century
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Chandra Levy and missing women
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
fallout



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 566
Location: The Great NorthEast

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:52 pm    Post subject: Going Back to the Time/Scene of the Crime of the Century Reply with quote

Um....There's somebody missing here! Reminds me of that Kevin Costner movie "No Way Out"...

Something to put the scene in perspective..from my old files...

Cheers,
James


For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 1, 2001


Remarks by the President to Students and Faculty at National Defense University
Fort Lesley J. Mcnair
Washington, D.C.


2:40 P.M. EDT


THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I appreciate you being here. I also want to thank Secretary Powell for being here as well. My National Security Advisor, Condi Rice is here, as well as the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Myers. I appreciate Admiral Clark and General Ryan here, for being here as well. But most of all, I want to thank you, Admiral Gaffney, and the students for NDU for having me here today.


For almost 100 years, this campus has served as one of our country's premier centers for learning and thinking about America's national security. Some of America's finest soldiers have studied here: Dwight Eisenhower and Colin Powell. Some of America's finest statesmen have taught here; George Kennan. Today, you're carrying on this proud tradition forward, continuing to train tomorrow's generals, admirals and other national security thinkers, and continuing to provide the intellectual capital for our nation's strategic vision.

This afternoon, I want us to thank back some 30 years to a far different time in a far different world. The United States and the Soviet Union were locked in a hostile rivalry. The Soviet Union was our unquestioned enemy; a highly-armed threat to freedom and democracy. Far more than that wall in Berlin divided us.

Our highest ideal was -- and remains -- individual liberty. Theirs was the construction of a vast communist empire. Their totalitarian regime held much of Europe captive behind an iron curtain.

We didn't trust them, and for good reason. Our deep differences were expressed in a dangerous military confrontation that resulted in thousands of nuclear weapons pointed at each other on hair-trigger alert. Security of both the United States and the Soviet Union was based on a grim premise: that neither side would fire nuclear weapons at each other, because doing so would mean the end of both nations.

We even went so far as to codify this relationship in a 1972 ABM Treaty, based on the doctrine that our very survival would best be insured by leaving both sides completely open and vulnerable to nuclear attack. The threat was real and vivid. The Strategic Air Command had an airborne command post called the Looking Glass, aloft 24 hours a day, ready in case the President ordered our strategic forces to move toward their targets and release their nuclear ordnance.

The Soviet Union had almost 1.5 million troops deep in the heart of Europe, in Poland and Czechoslovakia, Hungary and East Germany. We used our nuclear weapons not just to prevent the Soviet Union from using their nuclear weapons, but also to contain their conventional military forces, to prevent them from extending the Iron Curtain into parts of Europe and Asia that were still free.

In that world, few other nations had nuclear weapons and most of those who did were responsible allies, such as Britain and France. We worried about the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries, but it was mostly a distant threat, not yet a reality.

Today, the sun comes up on a vastly different world. The Wall is gone, and so is the Soviet Union. Today's Russia is not yesterday's Soviet Union. Its government is no longer Communist. Its president is elected. Today's Russia is not our enemy, but a country in transition with an opportunity to emerge as a great nation, democratic, at peace with itself and its neighbors. The Iron Curtain no longer exists. Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic are free nations, and they are now our allies in NATO, together with a reunited Germany.

Yet, this is still a dangerous world, a less certain, a less predictable one. More nations have nuclear weapons and still more have nuclear aspirations. Many have chemical and biological weapons. Some already have developed the ballistic missile technology that would allow them to deliver weapons of mass destruction at long distances and at incredible speeds. And a number of these countries are spreading these technologies around the world.

Most troubling of all, the list of these countries includes some of the world's least-responsible states. Unlike the Cold War, today's most urgent threat stems not from thousands of ballistic missiles in the Soviet hands, but from a small number of missiles in the hands of these states, states for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life. They seek weapons of mass destruction to intimidate their neighbors, and to keep the United States and other responsible nations from helping allies and friends in strategic parts of the world.

When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, the world joined forces to turn him back. But the international community would have faced a very different situation had Hussein been able to blackmail with nuclear weapons. Like Saddam Hussein, some of today's tyrants are gripped by an implacable hatred of the United States of America. They hate our friends, they hate our values, they hate democracy and freedom and individual liberty. Many care little for the lives of their own people. In such a world, Cold War deterrence is no longer enough.

To maintain peace, to protect our own citizens and our own allies and friends, we must seek security based on more than the grim premise that we can destroy those who seek to destroy us. This is an important opportunity for the world to re-think the unthinkable, and to find new ways to keep the peace.

Today's world requires a new policy, a broad strategy of active nonproliferation, counterproliferation and defenses. We must work together with other like-minded nations to deny weapons of terror from those seeking to acquire them. We must work with allies and friends who wish to join with us to defend against the harm they can inflict. And together we must deter anyone who would contemplate their use.

We need new concepts of deterrence that rely on both offensive and defensive forces. Deterrence can no longer be based solely on the threat of nuclear retaliation. Defenses can strengthen deterrence by reducing the incentive for proliferation.

We need a new framework that allows us to build missile defenses to counter the different threats of today's world. To do so, we must move beyond the constraints of the 30 year old ABM Treaty. This treaty does not recognize the present, or point us to the future. It enshrines the past. No treaty that prevents us from addressing today's threats, that prohibits us from pursuing promising technology to defend ourselves, our friends and our allies is in our interests or in the interests of world peace.

This new framework must encourage still further cuts in nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons still have a vital role to play in our security and that of our allies. We can, and will, change the size, the composition, the character of our nuclear forces in a way that reflects the reality that the Cold War is over.

I am committed to achieving a credible deterrent with the lowest-possible number of nuclear weapons consistent with our national security needs, including our obligations to our allies. My goal is to move quickly to reduce nuclear forces. The United States will lead by example to achieve our interests and the interests for peace in the world.

Several months ago, I asked Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld to examine all available technologies and basing modes for effective missile defenses that could protect the United States, our deployed forces, our friends and our allies. The Secretary has explored a number of complementary and innovative approaches.

The Secretary has identified near-term options that could allow us to deploy an initial capability against limited threats. In some cases, we can draw on already established technologies that might involve land-based and sea-based capabilities to intercept missiles in mid-course or after they re-enter the atmosphere. We also recognize the substantial advantages of intercepting missiles early in their flight, especially in the boost phase.

The preliminary work has produced some promising options for advanced sensors and interceptors that may provide this capability. If based at sea or on aircraft, such approaches could provide limited, but effective, defenses.

We have more work to do to determine the final form the defenses might take. We will explore all these options further. We recognize the technological difficulties we face and we look forward to the challenge. Our nation will assign the best people to this critical task.

We will evaluate what works and what does not. We know that some approaches will not work. We also know that we will be able to build on our successes. When ready, and working with Congress, we will deploy missile defenses to strengthen global security and stability.

I've made it clear from the very beginning that I would consult closely on the important subject with our friends and allies who are also threatened by missiles and weapons of mass destruction.

Today, I'm announcing the dispatch of high-level representatives to Allied capitals in Europe, Asia, Australia and Canada to discuss our common responsibility to create a new framework for security and stability that reflects the world of today. They will begin leaving next week.

The delegations will be headed by three men on this stage: Rich Armitage, Paul Wolfowitz, and Steve Hadley; Deputies of the State Department, the Defense Department and the National Security staff. Their trips will be part of an ongoing process of consultation, involving many people and many levels of government, including my Cabinet Secretaries.

These will be real consultations. We are not presenting our friends and allies with unilateral decisions already made. We look forward to hearing their views, the views of our friends, and to take them into account.

We will seek their input on all the issues surrounding the new strategic environment. We'll also need to reach out to other interested states, including China and Russia. Russia and the United States should work together to develop a new foundation for world peace and security in the 21st century. We should leave behind the constraints of an ABM Treaty that perpetuates a relationship based on distrust and mutual vulnerability. This Treaty ignores the fundamental breakthroughs in technology during the last 30 years. It prohibits us from exploring all options for defending against the threats that face us, our allies and other countries.

That's why we should work together to replace this Treaty with a new framework that reflects a clear and clean break from the past, and especially from the adversarial legacy of the Cold War. This new cooperative relationship should look to the future, not to the past. It should be reassuring, rather than threatening. It should be premised on openness, mutual confidence and real opportunities for cooperation, including the area of missile defense. It should allow us to share information so that each nation can improve its early warning capability, and its capability to defend its people and territory. And perhaps one day, we can even cooperate in a joint defense.

I want to complete the work of changing our relationship from one based on a nuclear balance of terror, to one based on common responsibilities and common interests. We may have areas of difference with Russia, but we are not and must not be strategic adversaries. Russia and America both face new threats to security. Together, we can address today's threats and pursue today's opportunities. We can explore technologies that have the potential to make us all safer.

This is a time for vision; a time for a new way of thinking; a time for bold leadership. The Looking Glass no longer stands its 24-hour-day vigil. We must all look at the world in a new, realistic way, to preserve peace for generations to come.

God bless. (Applause.)

END 2:56 P.M. EDT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
fallout



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 566
Location: The Great NorthEast

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FYI

National Defense University

Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington DC

Welcome to the National Defense University. The University is located on the grounds of Fort Lesley J. McNair in Southwest Washington, DC between the Anacostia river and the Washington Channel.

Travel Directions:


Via METRO: NDU is located about 1 mile from the Washington Metro’s Waterfront station on the Green Line. Leaving the station, walk down 4th Street (S) three blocks until it ends and becomes P Street SW. The Ft McNair main gate will be plainly visible.

From Arlington and points South and West (via 14th St Bridge): Follow I-395 North across the Potomac River to the Maine Avenue exit. Follow the exit ahead and turn left (E) on to Maine Ave at the traffic light. Follow Maine Ave until it curves left and becomes M Street SW. Turn right (S) on to 4th Street SW and continue (S) three blocks until it ends and becomes P Street SW. The Ft McNair main gate will be plainly visible.
From Alexandria or Anacostia (via Woodrow Wilson Bridge): Follow I-295 North to the South Capitol Street exit. Proceed across the South Capitol Street Bridge, staying to the right. Bear right coming off the bridge, avoiding the underpass, and turn left on to M Street SW at the traffic light. Continue West on M Street SW to 4th Street SW. Turn left (S) on to 4th Street SW and continue (S) three blocks until it ends and becomes P Street SW. The Ft McNair main gate will be plainly visible.

From Maryland, Prince George’s County and Eastern Montgomery County: Follow the Capitol Beltway (I-495 or I-95) to the Baltimore-Washington (B-W) Parkway exit. Proceed Southbound on the B-W Parkway. As you near Washington, the B-W Parkway will become I-295 South, continue on I-295 to the Suitland Parkway exit. Exit at the Suitland Parkway and immediately exit on to I-295 Northbound. After joining I-295 North exit immediately at the South Capitol Street exit. Proceed across the South Capitol Street Bridge, staying to the right. Bear right coming off the bridge, avoiding the underpass, and turn left on to M Street SW at the traffic light. Continue West on M Street SW to 4th Street SW. Turn left (S) on to 4th Street SW and continue (S) three blocks until it ends and becomes P Street SW. The Ft McNair main gate will be plainly visible.

Via DoD SHUTTLE BUS from the Pentagon: The Route No. 6 bus from the Pentagon departs every 30 minutes starting at 0820 until 1550. Travel time to the Ft McNair main gate is approximately 15 minutes. The No. 6 bus continues ahead to the Coast Guard Building behind NDU. The walk to Marshall Hall from the Coast Guard Building via the pedestrian gate behind the ICAF building is considerably shorter than the walk from the Main Gate.

At the Ft McNair Main Gate: Please ask the guard at the gate for direction to the building you wish to visit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
laskipper



Joined: 17 Sep 2002
Posts: 1232
Location: Northern Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your post has me thinking, Fallout....

Thanks for the article!

The past few months have me thinking of Australia. Wonder if the housing is reasonable?

ls
_________________
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves
~
French philosopher Bertrand de Jouvenel (1903-1987)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



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

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmm, one more place Condit wasn't that afternoon Chandra disappeared.

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



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 566
Location: The Great NorthEast

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RD old friend,

The older I get the more I think Condit spent that afternoon gazing at his "beautiful haircut" in a mirror in his office. Is anybody from the FBI around who might have checked Condit's office computer to see if he was on it that day? I think he's got an airtight (but sealed by national security rules) alibi for that day and knows he can sue the media with guaranteed results as soon as his lawyers pay folks a visit.

Keep lookin' !!!

James

P.S. - Why was Ted Kennedy's press secretary organizing the first vigil on May 19, 2001? I don't think it was to protect her fat boss but possibly because maybe the folks on "the Hill" knew that something bad had been done by someone beyond the reach of the law!

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



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

PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2006 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If only Condit could show he was in his office with his staffers that afternoon, James. If only. He's done his best to imply it without saying enough to be convicted of, at a minimum, perjury.

Of course, Condit hasn't said anything under oath for just that reason.

I cover in depth Condit's whereabouts the afternoon Chandra disappeared in chapter Alibi in Murder on a Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy. Here are some excepts from Alibi:

The New York Times added that the schedule given to ABC included "omissions." Michael Doyle of the Modesto Bee was told: "It went out when it wasn't ready to go."

"Bits and pieces with omissions that went out when it wasn't ready to go". In other words, "oops, Condit didn't want you to see that. If it was exposed to the light of day, then people who ask questions would be able to see just what lies he was getting away with for an alibi." Can't have that now, can we?

How had this timeline been exposed to the light of day, what "bits and pieces" in it were not ready for its antiseptic glare, and why?

Just before Chandra logged off the internet for the last time and disappeared, Condit went into a private meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney in Cheney's office he keeps in the House of Representatives to discuss the California energy crisis, that crisis of a deregulation experiment that was bringing down Condit's ally, Governor Gray Davis.

Cheney's press secretary, Juleanna Glover Weisss, said the meeting happened between 12:30 p.m. and 12:50 p.m., "at Condit's request." The Newport is just ten blocks from the Capitol, and Chandra logged off ten minutes after Condit left the meeting. What a coincidence. The D.C. police say Condit is not a suspect. Surely Condit has an alibi to not be a suspect? We will see.

The critical time of Chandra's disappearance was well alibied for the police. A meeting with the Vice President at 12:30 pm, returning at 3:30 pm. Meetings, phone calls, a visit to the doctor, votes, another meeting with a reporter at the Tryst. A busy day indeed to account for his time, dominated by an afternoon with the Vice President when Chandra disappeared. That is what returning at 3:30 pm means, doesn't it? After all, if he wasn't with the Vice President, where could he be?

The three hours with Cheney was replaced with, according to Isikoff, returning to his office after a 20 to 25 minute meeting "taking phone calls" and meeting with staff members. "He may also have gone to the House gym and worked out," Isikoff reports.

"Taking phone calls"? "May have gone to the gym"? English translation. He wasn't in his office and no one knows where he was. Taking phone calls means there's no record of dialing a number to know who he was talking to which would have confirmed he was there. What did he do, play Frasier to Dayton's Roz saying "caller on line 3" and him answering with "I'm listening"?

Was there even one constituent who reported talking to Condit Tuesday afternoon? Any staff besides Dayton? Except that Condit may have gone to the gym, the corrected timeline now says. Any congressmen that lifted weights with him that afternoon, or just a solitary unmemorable workout?

He had a doctor's appointment for 5 pm, according to his timeline. Had he been deadlifting 110 pounds and hurt his back? But no doctor was reported to have seen Condit.

So no verifiable alibi for the whole afternoon when Chandra disappeared. He didn't vote until 6:30 pm. That is five and a half hours from when Condit left the meeting with Cheney until he voted, with only Dayton vowing to have been with him, except when Condit "may have gone to the gym". Five and a half hours is extreme, but given that Dayton told Joleen McKay that talking about the past "will ruin you", essentially unalibied.

rd
_________________
ralph@ee.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
fallout



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 566
Location: The Great NorthEast

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RD!

Yes, you've got a point here.

We have at least two separate lies from the Condit office:

1. The meeting with the reporter at Tryst. (It took place the next day).

and

2. The doctor's appointment. (Which doctor? He's never been confirmed anywhere as far as we know. Maybe the grand jury but that's sealed for now.)

One small correction. I believe that Condit met Cheney in the hallway, not in an office. This of course makes the meeting even less convincing as an alibi. Cheney flew off shortly after this meeting to chat with the state legislators in California to help keep them in line about the Enron scam.

Still, Condit is winning these libel suits. And he's a public figure so his proof has to be stonger than his word against the world. I think he's got something solid that his lawyers pull out at the last minute in order to reach a settlement each time. Its enough to scare off the Enquirer, People, Dominick Dunne and most of the media.

Think about it. Aside from your book and the Enquirer's and the episode of Law and Order there hasn't been any attempt to examine this mystery. It was the biggest story in the world for three months and then it got shut down. Why?

I've drawn some very scary conclusions about that and won't be satisfied until we get a complete explanation.

One thing to keep in mind though. There's no statute of limitations on our investigation here. Someday we'll figure it out!

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



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

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Several points to be made, James. The meeting was in Cheney's office in the House building but Condit attended alone. Cheney had aides with him as I understand it.

Condit requested the meeting. When? Why? Not the "they were reaching out to me" lie, but really why? We'll never know, but what if Condit asked for that meeting with Cheney the day before when he was at a White House luncheon with the president as I suspect?

What are the odds that one of the few Democratic congressmen who could get an immediate audience with Cheney used that power just before his mistress disappeared?

How can one measure the power in giving the police a timeline that says "met with Vice President Cheney at 12:30, returned to office at 3:30"?

How many DC police would question that careful parsing and just assume he was with the vice president during the time Chandra disappeared?

How many DC police are capable of asking a question of people as powerful as that?

Speaking of which, Chief Gainer at the time just resigned unexpectedly as head of Capitol Security, a job he was given when the investigation into Chandra's disappearance never took place.

I say that with great regret, as Gainer was the only coherent voice in the DC police, but yet, an investigation didn't happen and buried, buried much faster than Chandra was.

Also, Condit has settled in every case when he was finally forced to testify under oath. He has always settled rather than answer any questions under oath. I doubt he is getting anything other than an apology for anything misconstrued.

rd
_________________
ralph@ee.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
fallout



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 566
Location: The Great NorthEast

PostPosted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RD!

You said "The meeting was in Cheney's office in the House building but Condit attended alone. "

Actually, Mike Dayton was with him in this brief hallway conference with Cheney.

Afterwards, Dayton drove over to pick up Mrs. Condit to take her to the special event with the other Congressional wives.

Nothing in this to keep Darryl from driving over to the Newport to pick Chandra up to meet somebody in the woods but, for some reason, I don't think so.

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



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

PostPosted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 7:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

James, it was 20 minutes in Cheney's office, a requested scheduled meeting with the Vice President that took place in his office in the Congressional building, not a brief encounter in a hallway.

The scheduling is suspect. It appears this was a last minute meeting granted during lunch hour by a vice president to one of the few Democratic congressmen who was an important enough vote with the administration to be granted a last minute meeting.

Dayton met Cheney when he brought Condit there, but he didn't go into the meeting with Condit. Condit didn't have any aides wth him. As I write in Murder on a Horse Trail, I find this also unusual.

Condit made too much of the meeting for an alibi, you are not making enough of it. Condit requested the meeting with Cheney just before Chandra disappeared for a reason, and it wasn't to discuss his vote on an energy issue, although that's what was discussed.

rd
_________________
ralph@ee.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
fallout



Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 566
Location: The Great NorthEast

PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello again,

I've been bombarded by the horrific "adware" viruses lately and apparently each time I activate a new anti-virus it wipes out my password here so please forgive me for the long delays in responses or contributions.

Anyway,

As I remember the days leading up to the disappearance of Chandra Levy five years ago I remember the world we were living in and my interests at the time.

If I were a cynical guy I would say that a lot of money has been shifted around and a few thousand more people have died by international violence while a few thousand fewer have died as a result of domestic criminal violence (although that statistic is creeping up again).

But that would negate the tragedy of the individual deaths and the suffering of families and individuals who just wanted to live their lives and engage in the "pursuit of happiness".

In particular, Chandra's death pierced the happiness of Robert and Susan Levy and their son Adam. I met the Levy family one time and saw how real they were. It was not an abstract illusion. It was real suffering.

The Levy family deserves an answer to the question 'Why?"! It will probably come from a forensic expert with new technology at his command or the confession of a haunted witness. But I want to think that what we do here will facilitate that answer.

I rely on the professionals to continue to dig through all the evidence. I wish that we could get a look at it all: The contents of her computer; the phone records; the statements to the Grand Jury; the statements and movements of some of those we've suspected; the security videos from the Newport from May 1, 2001(which I don't believe were inaccessable); the FBI and CIA and NSA files that were compiled when Chandra was applying for a position at those agencies; the witness statements from employees at the USC Washington Center on 10th street; The D.C. police file; the identity of the dog walker and why he remained anonymous and un-rewarded; the notes of detective Ralph Durant; and a few other odds and ends.

Its April 27, 2006. Its been almost five years. The resolution to this case is overdue and urgently needed by the family. Isn't there someone out there who could shine a light on the Crime of the Century?

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



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

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NBC 4 in DC providing some coverage of Chandra's case at 5 years at http://www.nbc4.com/news/9078572/detail.html (fair use)

5 Years Later, No One Charged In Levy Case
D.C. Sergeant Discusses Cold Chandra Levy Case
NBC4
April 28, 2006

WASHINGTON -- It's been five years since Chandra Levy went missing, and no one has been charged in the controversial crime.

Levy was a Washington intern involved with a married congressman. After the relationship and the internship came to an end, Levy's life mysteriously came to an end. About a year after she disappeared, her body was found in Rock Creek Park.

"I don't know exactly how she was murdered," said D.C. police Sgt. J.C. Young. "Possibly strangulation ... Maybe there was a sex act."

Young, who specializes in hard, old, real-life murder mysteries, doubts that Levy was killed by someone she knew or by someone trying to rob her.

Levy, 24, was last seen on April 30, 2001, at a health club on Connecticut Avenue. There is evidence that she was in her apartment looking at a guide to Rock Creek Park on her computer the next day.

There is speculation that she went to the park to meet someone, but Young doesn't think so.

Former U.S. Rep. Gary Condit, a Democrat from Modesto, Calif., posted a $10,000 reward in the case. He was linked romantically to Levy and repeatedly denied having anything to do with her disappearance, even paying for his own lie detector test to prove it.

"Mr. Condit got caught on some infidelity, basically," Young said. "And once you're a public figure, then the public's going to speak, and they spoke. They didn't appreciate his infidelity and they spoke with the election."

Levy's parents Dr. Robert and Suasn Levy led a crusade to find out what happened to their daughter. They hired powerful attorneys and knowledgeable private investigators.

"Their efforts brought more information to the public's eye," Young said.

Police searched all over for Levy, even in Rock Creek Park, but nothing was found until May 22, 2002. A man walking his dog looking for turtle shells found Levy's remains on an embankment in the park. The discovery of the skeletal remains intensified the investigation, but no one has ever been charged.

Ingmar Gaundique -- a man convicted of assaulting female joggers in Rock Creek Park -- has not been ruled out as a possible suspect, but investigators don't have enough evidence to charge him or anyone else.

Copyright 2006 by nbc4.com.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



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

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is a basically a whitewash of Condit.

- Condit is described as paying for his own lie detector test to try to clear himself. Not mentioned is his refusal to take the police lie detector test or that the test he paid $1,000 for was three pre-arranged questions. The DC police chief said it was useless.

- The DC detective doesn't think Chandra was killed by someone she knew and doesn't think she went to Rock Creek Park to meet someone. He clearly thinks she was murdered in a sexual attack.

- Given the almost impossible odds of her being randomly dumped in a park that she just happened to be looking up on her computer before she disappeared, he also apparently believes she went there on her own.

- He's apparently the source for similar National Enquirer stories, theories so pathetic that they are truly worthy of a tabloid.

- The article basically said that Guandique did it but no one can prove it, but didn't say that, unlike Condit, Guandique took the police lie detector test and passed it.

I have an entire chapter on Guandique in Murder on a Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy. The circumstances and questions surrounding Condit and Guandique are complex, and all a brief newspaper article can do is try to make the obscure less obscure.

rd
_________________
ralph@ee.net
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: Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is another one also on NBC4.com

http://www.nbc4.com/news/9080242/detail.html?treets=dc&tid=2654321779813&tml=dc_8pm&tmi=dc_

I hope this comes up. If not, it is on nbc4.com for the 8pm headlines last night. It is about Brad Garrett going back to the scene and is kinda grafic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



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

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was working on that now. Fell asleep last night before I could finish it. thanks blondie.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
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 1, 2  Next
Page 1 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