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 

Chandra Levy: Five years later
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Background Information on Chandra Levy
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rd



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

PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the info, jane. I believe you're right, but I think it's rude not to even respond. I doubt they even see anything. Probably filtered through some legal wonk.

James, thanks for your observations. I'm going to take each one and write with some detail on it in this Five Years After thread. I just finished a months long project that was taking all my time.

I've been running on empty, just like this investigation.

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



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

PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, here I go again. I guess if we all write long enough, and loud enough, about this investigation maybe something will come of all our efforts. Maybe someone will develop shareware software to filter us off of the Internet completely.

Until they do, here we are. I have thought up at least one new angle of investigation. We could go out and do more investigating ourselves, not in person on some geographical site (of course if that is possible by some that also could be done), but by email Internet investigation.

I have tried from almost the beginning here to email many of the reporters who have written stories about the Chandra Levy investigation. As most of you probably know here we do not get many replies back from the reporters. (If someone has received a lot of replies, speak out, and tell the rest of us how to get replies). i have received a few replies from reporters. I will mention only one of our favorite reporters, Mike Doyle. There was a ModBee Chandra Levy timeline some moths back, and I wrote to Doyle and asked him why the Otis Thomas story had been left out. Whether or not the story was true, there seemed to be parts of the complete story that had to be true, for example Susan Levy saying that she had phoned Chandra about the story trying to find out more about what Chandra was doing in Washington. We all know the historic reply, "he explained it all." But evidently most newspapers had never heard those words or did not consider them to be part of the Chandra Levy timeline.

I received a brief reply from Doyle, which I have somewhere but will not try to quote verbatim here. Doyle emailed that he had not been assigned the story and that he did not know exactly why the Thomas story had been left out. Doyle did mention that perhaps there was too much controversy to the story.

I did not write to anyone else about how the Chandra Levy timeline published by newspapers was being abbreviated, but perhaps I should of. The Washington Post reporter was one of the first reporters to say that the Thomas story was false, but that reporter also did not include the whole story.

So there are a lot of reporters whom we could question about a lot of phases of the Chandra Levy investigation. I will have a followup on this subject, but some here may want it in a different topic. Whatever topic it goes into my next message will not be easily filtered out.

I might say about my writing to Mike Doyle that in one email, perhaps in my one about the Otis Thomas Story, I mentioned the fact that I had written an email to Joseph McMcnamara at the Hoover Institute and that Mcnamara had responded to me right away. Doyle's reply to me, in whatever email that he responded with, was that he knew McNamara and had interviewed him several times. My mention of McNamara may have been the reason that I got a reply from Doyle.

In my next mention of this yet to be filtered out topic I will mention J. Vernon Mcgee and a quotation from the Bible. That message may take me a few days to write. We need all of the help that we can get in solving the Chandra Levy case, so I am going to try to reach out for more support.

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



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

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fallout wrote: I'd never considered the idea of Condit offering to pay for her trip home for graduation. That would certainly explain why she didn't book. But we do have the report that she had emailed information to her parents about flights..as if to have them pay for it. I'm not sure what to think...
Updating on the above. I went back and read the info in your book and now see that the email dealt with a connecting flight and not the DC to California travel plan. More possible that she was waiting for word from 'somebody' about when and how to travel home.



Yes, James, it is so obvious that Chandra would have flown once again on her boyfriend the Congressman's ticket but many things changed very quickly, and they changed just before she disappeared.

The changes were far too complex for other than a few reporters like Lengel and Doyle to grasp, and what could be grasped was too secretive to dare be printed. All those secrets revolve around a promotional flight fare email received by Chandra's parents the day Chandra disappeared.

But to understand the flight to a graduation she never took, we have to understand what she was doing in Washington to earn that graduation, which takes us to another point you raise.

In visiting that, we will arrive here once again.

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



Joined: 18 Jul 2005
Posts: 46

PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let me start by saying that I'm glad that the Levy's went to the trouble to start their website in hopes of getting tips on a new lead that will finally break the case open, but honestly, they're missing their chance as far as actually helping to resolve this case. Simply putting up a site that gives little information, no personal opinions, asking for some new lead, and meanwhile ignoring the suggestions of those of us who would like to see a resolution in this is simply not enough. The clue that finally breaks this case is not likely to fall out of the sky. Can you envision Gary Condit, sweating at the brow after seeing the Levy's new website, and under the intense pressure, finally deciding to come clean and turn himself in? I'm afraid the Levy's are going to have to roll up their sleeves and go after the one you, I, and anybody who looks at the facts of this case objectively know is responsible: Gary Condit.

They have nothing to lose. Perhaps they've been listening to the soothing words of these 'legal wonks', as RD calls them, for far too long, and have been lulled into a fantasy that there are investigators still working on this case, and that a big break could come at any time. We know that is simply not the case. The powerful forces that control national politics and the media have shut down any serious investigation into the Chandra Levy case since the earliest days of the investigation. Is it perhaps because Condit has some dirt on some very powerful people and is holding it over their heads? He lived a pretty wild life as a congressman. He ran around with virtually anything that moved, and rumor had it he 'swung both ways'. If that's true, he may have swung with some pretty powerful people, and could ruin the careers of some of our still active top level politicians.

Whatever the secret reasons behind this coverup, the Levy's are key in getting this investigation moving again. They alone can create a big enough stir, if they DEMAND justice be done. They alone can get the attention of the national media, just as they did in 2001. This case might be five years old now, and Chandra Levy might be considered 'old news' by some. But is is NOT old news as long as there is no resolution. It is NOT old news as long as there are high level people blocking any serious investigation. It is NOT old news as long as Gary Condit is living comfortably off a congressional pension, running a Baskin Robbins ice cream parlor, selling real estate and God knows what else, when he should have long ago been forced to at least stand trial for the murder of Chandra Levy. If her parents are not outraged enough to do what has to be done, who then will be?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



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

PostPosted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fallout wrote: The tenure of the internship was locked in with her classes, wasn't it? According to the Washington Semester prospectus published by USC it should have expired sometime in April and Chandra should have been aware of this. There was a set number of days.

I can imagine her thinking was that she was doing a great job and would be asked to join the BOP as a regular employee. And that's where a nervous congressman might interfere and block the offer. But I never saw info that she could continue the USC-related internship after finishing classes and the allowed time after that.



Everything about Chandra's internship is a mystery, and much of what transpired around her disappearance hinges on it. Yet there has never been a public accounting for the many questions we have raised about it in chapter BOP in Murder on a Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy.

That Condit himself suggests Chandra's disappearance was related to her work on the execution of Timothy McVeigh only adds fuel to the unexplained mysteries of what happened at the Bureau of Prisons PR office where she worked.

Chandra obtained a prestigious $27,000 paid internship in the public relations office of the Bureau of Prisons office in DC with one phone call from California. The Modesto Bee reported that Condit arranged for her internship. The BOP denies this. Yet if Condit and the BOP were secretly complicit in arranging her internship, they likely would be secretly complicit in ending it. There is every indication that is exactly what happened just a week before she disappeared.

Chandra moved from a Virginia suburb to downtown DC a few blocks from Condit around the time she started at the BOP. This is also the same time she visited Condit's office with her friend Jennifer Baker. Jennifer was offered a volunteer internship on the spot by Condit, yet it was Chandra who stayed behind with Condit when Jennifer left. Jennifer was obviously planted there by Condit and Chandra as cover for Chandra's visits to Condit.

After Chandra's disappearance, the BOP, specifically Chandra's boss in the PR office, stated that Chandra was on a normal six month internship that ended on schedule. Yet everyone else in Chandra's USC Masters internship program in DC only had a Fall semester internship, returned home to California with Chandra to take semester finals in December, and stayed home in California. Only Chandra returned to continue in her internship.

How was her six month internship considered normal by the BOP if all of her fellow students were on three month internship programs and had all returned home months earlier? Even this glaring discrepancy was unable to be covered or even understood by reporters within the time, space, and political constraints of newspaper reporting.

The end of her internship corresponds to when she asked Condit about Jennifer Thomas. This was mid April, after the visit from her parents and pressure on her to get answers from Condit. The end of her internship came suddenly, immediately, on a Friday about a week later, completely to Chandra's surprise and dismay, when she was told to clear out her desk and leave.

She had applied to both the BOP and FBI for permanent federal jobs, yet both agencies denied they had her job applications. The BOP in one statement even cited the lack of a job application from her as a reason for telling her to leave. Again, anything but normal, yet up until that day she expected to continue living and working in DC, and for her trip to her graduation to be a round trip ticket.

No mention is ever made of this. It is just too complicated for reporters to explain, but nothing has more impact on the circumstances surrounding what Chandra would have been doing to arrange for a trip to LA for her Masters Degree graduation.

It is that very trip, with last minute changes forced upon her by mysterious actions at the Bureau of Prisons, that brings us to the email that Chandra's parents received the day she disappeared.

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



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

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I want to quit, and I want to quit, and I want to quit, but rd you bring up some very interesting informaiton there.

The only place I can think of that might give the information a thoughtful ear is possibly a California Senator's office. I have been voting for Senator Dianne Feinstein for many years, and if my desire to quit does not overcome my desire to write to her, I might write to her office,

I don't think that California was really involved in the Chandra Levy investigation. That is the reason that I referred to Chandra recently as a California Federal Employee I think that there are gaps for fair play in California, and if we could get something started here then that something might take off.

In the meantime I have not forgotten the bible reference that I mentioned, but did not quote, where in the Old Testament a woman had a grievance against a man, but the judge would not listen to the woman. Finally the woman figured out what to do. She would go to the judge's courroom each day and sat and stare at the judge all day all day long.

That sort of worried the judge, and the judge decided to approve the woman's grievance. I forget what bible verse that was in. Don't tell me no one here has heard that one.

Law enforcement does not seem to have been very helpful to Chandra supporters, but it might be different with workers working for the government. I do not know how much information the civil government can withhold.

It ain't over until it is over.

benn lvtin7888
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



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

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fox News:
Levy had told friends and family that she hoped to be hired full-time with the Bureau when her internship ended, but a casual remark to a co-worker ended her aspirations. Although she was planning to attend commencement ceremonies at the University of Southern California in mid-May, Levy mentioned to a personnel officer at the Bureau that she had technically completed her master's degree in public administration in December 2000.This new information, Levy was told, meant that her internship was invalid. She was asked to leave.

Talk:
"Levy was ambitious too. Her goal was a high-powered career in law enforcement, possibly with the FBI. As she told her parents, the Bureau of Prisons job, which paid $27,000 a year, was "the best internship I could possibly get". But on April 23, a week before she disappeared, she had to clean out her desk and leave. She had mentioned to someone in personnel that she had finished her course work in December, and was informed she had been violating bureau policy by remaining an intern when she had finished classes.

NEWSWEEK:
Chandra Levy didn't realize it, but she'd just talked herself out of a job. Last spring the now missing Washington intern was so happy with her temporary post at the Federal Bureau of Prisons that she'd told friends and family she hoped to be hired on full time after getting her master's degree in public administration from USC.

Then one day she offhandedly mentioned to a personnel officer that, officially, she'd graduated last December. She just needed to pick up her diploma at the May graduation ceremony back home in California. The officer was taken aback. Levy's internship was supposed to expire four months after graduation. Now she would have to leave. Her friends and family told police that she was upset at her sudden dismissal, NEWSWEEK has learned, and hastily prepared to return to California. She e-mailed her landlord on April 28, informing him that she would have to leave her apartment, and began packing her things. Three days later she disappeared, leaving nearly all of her personal belongings behind.

New York Daily News:
The Daily News obtained an e-mail Levy wrote two days before she disappeared in which she sounded bitter about the way her sojourn in Washington ended.

"My plans have suddenly changed ... I think it would be best if I left a little earlier," she wrote to her landlord, explaining why she was moving out.

In the e-mail, sent at 11:14 p.m. on April 28, Levy said she was going home early because her internship at the Bureau of Prisons had been abruptly terminated. "This was not the way the program I was in was supposed to work," she wrote, adding, "someone in the human resources office of the agency I worked for didn't do their job very well."

WashTimes:
Chandra's federal internship ended abruptly April 23 over a technicality in her graduation date; she never applied for a permanent job.

New York Daily News:
But Traci Billingsley, Levy's boss at the Bureau of Prisons, said there was no such work problem.

"It was a 180-day internship, and it ended on schedule. Believe me, we would have loved to keep her on. She was a very good worker," Billingsley said.

end quote

It is almost assured that HR in the Bureau of Prisons received anonymous information that caused them to terminate Chandra's internship immediately, tell her to clear out her desk, and find and destroy her application for permanent Federal employment.

What information did they receive, who had reason to anonymously tell the BOP something about her which may not even have been true, and why is the BOP hiding what they did just before Chandra disappeared?

rd
_________________
ralph@ee.net
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 Jun 28, 2006 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's an article from the USC Trojan newspaper three weeks after Chandra disappeared:

Search continues for USC student
Levy: Master’s degree candidate last seen April 30; police and family face conflicting rumors as to her whereabouts
By KIMBERLY BRITTON
Contributing Writer

Chandra Ann Levy, a 24-year-old graduate student expected to receive her Master's Degree on May 11, remains missing after her disappearance over three weeks ago.

Chandra was completing a six-month internship at the United States Bureau of Prisons in Washington D.C., as a part of her last year in the USC Master's program in the School of Policy, Planning and Development, where she was pursuing a degree in Public Administration with an emphasis in Government Studies.

Her bags were packed and she was ready to come home to California for graduation when she mysteriously disappeared.
end quote

In this student newspaper article, they have the opportunity to describe the student internship position that Chandra had more accurately than others. They also describe it as a six month internship. On the other hand, every other detail reported was gleaned from national press accounts. They should know how it worked. Did they check?

But let's assume for a moment it was actually a six month internship as the BOP said and the student newspaper reports. The phrase that jogged my thoughts here was "ready to come home for graduation".

The six months did end right before her graduation. Or did it? She was told that by mentioning she had technically completed her program requirements in December that at four months later she was ineligible to continue being an intern and must leave immediately.

What are the possibilities here?

1) A six month internship as the BOP states. This would mean she started the internship in time to go home to California for a May 11 graduation.

But that would mean she didn't complete her requirements in December. Part of her requirements would be the six month internship. In that scenario, she is eligible to continue for another four months at the BOP as she applied for a conversion to permanent employment at the BOP or the FBI.

But Chandra could not have completed her requirements in December if she had only completed two months of her six month internship.

2) A four month extension as reported. Completing her degree requirements in December would mean that her internship was only two months. According to the BOP student intern information, this seems to be possible. The paid student internship was not portrayed as a rigidly scheduled program. The two months from October to December seems like it would be enough for a Master's Program work experience requirement.

That would mean then that Chandra did not participate in student intern reporting requirements after Christmas. She and everybody else would be well aware that she was no longer a student intern but a post graduate intern working toward conversion to permanent employment within four months.

But she clearly didn't know that. It was a complete surprise to her at the end of April that she would reluctantly have to give up her lease. She either expected permanent employment or an extension after her May 11 graduation, and she got neither, even though the BOP, actually her supervisor who was also the BOP spokesperson, is telling us that they would have loved to have her stay on. They lied to one of us, either Chandra or the public.

And how is a two month internship and four months post graduate work described as a six month internship that was completed on schedule? How is this four month conversion to permanent employment, that they told Chandra she had exceeded in some manner and was essentially persona non grata the same day, square with the six month internship described by the BOP to the press? It doesn't.

Then there was H.F., who wrote:

"Please bear with me as this note may be a bit long, but it might shed some light on the Chandra Levy disappearance. Shortly after I first heard that Chandra Levy, a former federal intern, was missing, I heard that she had been abruptly terminated from her job at the Federal Bureau of Prisons and that she was soon to return home to receive a Master of Public Administration degree from USC. The report about the abruptness of the termination bothered me.

"While most federal agencies have one sort of intern program or another, very few of those programs are so open-ended that an intern would be abruptly terminated in the manner in which the news stories would have us believe. The standard story says that her internship allowed her to work 4 months after she completed her degree requirements. We are supposed to believe that she completed her degree requirements last December but her supervisor in the Bureau of Prisons only realized in late April that she had done so and the 120 day grace period was about to expire so the supervisor ran a Standard Form 50 (Request for and Record of Personnel Action) through the system to terminate her employment. But that story is not plausible.
Only an extremely poorly run internship program would not have clear dates for specific personnel actions to be accomplished. Since it usually takes two to four weeks for an SF50 to make it through the personnel mill, the termination would have been abrupt only if Chandra had been dishonest with her supervisor and/or her supervisor was an incompetent dolt. (Okay, so we can rule neither possibility out!)

"But we also know that Chandra was an intern during the fall semester of 2000 and we have been led to believe that she did not finish her degree requirements until December 2000. What's the logical conclusion we deduce from that information? That Chandra's internship was part of her degree requirements. If so, her supervisor should have been providing some sort of written evaluations to USC probably on a monthly basis. If the internship was part of her degree program. The USC website ( http://www.usc.edu/schools/sppd/admissions/m_pa4.html ) shows that an internship can be 12 credit hours or one full semester of work toward the degree requirements. While it is possible that the internship was completed in one semester, it is also possible that Chandra signed up for 6 credits each of two semesters and that her termination from her internship at the Bureau of Prisons would have been tantamount to her not receiving her degree on May 11, 2001. If that's the case, she could well have decided simply to disappear rather than show up at graduation with her parents and be humiliated by not receiving a degree.

"Someone needs to know what the SF50 that terminated Chandra's employment said and what courses she took during the Fall and Spring semesters at USC."
end quote

Yes, and here's the class she took while an intern:

Modbee:
Levy was an intern for Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, then moved on to Washington. She took a class at USC's Washington center, studying federal management systems. And, from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. daily, she worked as an intern in the public information office at the federal Bureau of Prisons.
end quote

What kind of termination takes place in a government bureaucracy within hours on the same day the supervisor casually finds out that Chandra technically met her graduation requirements in December but was getting her diploma in May?

If it was a routine ending that had run the gauntlet of paper pushers in HR, what led Chandra to believe that the supervisor was surprised to discover that Chandra must be terminated immediately? If it was a routine ending, why didn't Chandra know she wasn't to be working after her graduation ceremony May 11?

How did they casually evoke this comment from Chandra exactly six months from the start of the internship? What extraordinary timing for a casual comment to, of all people, another BOP associate who just happened to work in HR? What are the odds of that? Why is an HR associate casually chatting with her about her degree requirements exactly four months after the so called completion of requirements?

Something about what the BOP did has misled the police from the beginning in investigating Chandra's disappearance. Someone didn't want Chandra to be a federal employee when she disappeared, someone who had reason to make her disappear.

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



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 866
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:36 am    Post subject: Chandra Levy: Five Years Later Reply with quote

I think it would be beneficial for us to elaborate on what kind of scenario there would have been, if Chandra had been a federal employee at the time of her disappearance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
benn



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

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello rd, I will quote you here from your last message.

Quote:
Something about what the BOP did has misled the police from the beginning in investigating Chandra's disappearance.

Someone didn't want Chandra to be a federal employee when she disappeared, someone who had reason to make her disappear.

rd


Calling Chandra a federal employee sort of rang a bell here for me, but that does not exactly mean a plus or a minus. In a couple of my messages on this board recently I called Chandra a California Federal employee. I did that because I was trying to involve Caifornia more in the investigation.

I don't think that anything that I wrote had any effect, but the rehashing of this subject has led me off in another direction. I recently wrote here about possibly writing to one of my U.S. Senators, or my U.S. Representative, about this case.

What we are talking about here, of Chandra being a Federal Employee, might appeal to an elected U.S. Legislator from California, in the
U.S. Congress, to reply to.

Legislators will sometimes get involved in more personal issues, when the issue is mostly strictly technical. This is an election year and most Legislators need votes, so if I can word a letter correctly to one of my U.S. Legislators I will try sending one. I might send this by postal mail so it will not get lost in spam.

Of course this is all hearsay until I actually send the letter.

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



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

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 7:43 am    Post subject: Re: Chandra Levy: Five Years Later Reply with quote

Rainbow wrote:
I think it would be beneficial for us to elaborate on what kind of scenario there would have been, if Chandra had been a federal employee at the time of her disappearance.


And not just a federal employee, but one in public relations at the Bureau of Prisons dealing with, among other things at the time, Timothy McVeigh, and a federal employee who was an applicant for the FBI.

The media attention would have been from the moment she was reported missing by the Bureau of Prisons, as in the case of IRS employee LaToya Taylor. From Another Federal employee missing, I write:

Two points should be obvious here; this is what happens when you' re still working for the government when you disappear, and this is what happens when it is known that you are intimately involved with the woman who disappears. A third point is less obvious. A paternity suit is involved here too.

rd


Search for IRS Worker Broadens
Ex-Boyfriend's Home and Jeep, Md. Lowland Scoured for Clues
By Allan Lengel and Jamie Stockwell
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 19, 2003

The search for IRS employee LaToya Taylor broadened yesterday as dozens of law enforcement officers looked through her ex-boyfriend's home and Jeep Cherokee and trudged for clues in a swampy lowland in Southern Maryland where her cellular phone had been called after she vanished last Friday.

end quote

That's the headline we should have been reading on May 3, 2001, but we didn't. The question is, who wanted this headline to disappear along with Chandra?

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



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 866
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 6:47 pm    Post subject: "Outcry for Justice" Reply with quote

In my opinion, the Levy family has been doing EVERYTHING humanly (and otherwise) possible to solve this case. It also appears that they have taken many of the actions that James has suggested.

Law enforcement may feel there is not enough evidence to convict anybody of the crime
AND
. . . IF some of the "prospective" evidence is somehow connected to government classified information, there may be a continual invisible barrier, blocking resolution, until the time when this information is de-classified.

As American citizens and parents, how would we feel if this was our child?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
benn



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

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have written this before in various ways.

Chandra was a young vibrant person, and she was alive, and living. That type of a person could not long endure in the life of an active Congressman who was married. The
living, vibrant, person would begin to become noticable to the rest of the world, something that the political life of a Congressman could not live with.

We know some of what Chandra was doing just before she disappeared, and one thing that she as doing was talking to her mother and aunt.

Probably she was breaking the silency rule that some of Condit's female acquaintances spoke of. Silency rule or no it is obvious that none of Condit's women acquaintnces would have been able to talk openly in public or show themseves with him in public--for long at least.

If Chandra was a person who somehow could not be silenced, then for the sake of at least one Congressman's career she had to be

silenced. Also, from Anne Marie Smith we learned that other men might have also been involved with Condit in whatever kind of private get to gethers he was talking about organizing.

All of this is hearsay I guess, but not entirely all. If other men were involved with Condit that would just be all the more need for concern for
silence. It does seem that law enforcement could have done a better job of investigating,

maybe not necessarily to arrest and prosecute someone, but maybe more so to keep the facts straight so no false rumours could fall around.

The only logical scheme it seems that would keep enough silence to protect the political careers of Condit and any other politician involved with him would be to make certain that the girls did not talk.

Of course Condit's hypothetical other men might not have been politicians at all. But if any of them were married that would still pose grave possibilities for them if they were
discovered. Chandra disappeared in something of a logical manner, because it seems that she had to disappear or else there were going to be discussions about divorces, or alimoney, or political affiliations etc.

I think I have roamed around enough here to show that certainly some close to Condit may have had urgent needs of concern for Chandra to quit talking.

If only some grand jury testimony could be acquired somewhere, that might begin to open the gates that would disclose the truth.

God, give us an assist in all of this.

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



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

PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Condit must have hit bottom, rock bottom so to speak. He's chasing that Golden Goose around again. More like a Golden Gosling. Maybe he thinks Cave Creek will pay him off without making him answer any questions...

LOL I don't think so.

Cave Creek. How appropriately Condit shorthand that is for Luray Caves and Rock Creek Park.

rd

from www.eastvalleytribune.com (fair use)

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=70138

Local News

Ex-lawmaker files libel suit against Cave Creek paper
By Gary Grado, Tribune
July 22, 2006

The Sonoran News, a small Cave Creek weekly newspaper, now has something in common with the National Enquirer and a world famous crime reporter: Former congressman Gary Condit has sued them for defamation.

Condit, who owns a home in Phoenix, sued the 30,000-circulation publication on July 14, alleging that it permanently harmed his reputation when it published a story that referred to his involvement with Chandra Levy.

Levy was a Bureau of Prisons intern whose body was found in a Washington, D.C., park about a year after her May 2001 disappearance.

“How could a newspaper in Cave Creek, Arizona, printing a statement that’s been printed thousands of places all over the country and all over the world — what additional harm could they inflict on Gary Condit even if it was ultimately false?” said attorney Dan Barr, who represents the Sonoran News.

Barr also is the Tribune’s lawyer.

The statement that Condit calls libelous ran July 2005 in a story about Condit’s younger brother, Darrell Condit, who was living in Cave Creek.

“Darrell Wayne Condit is the younger brother of Democratic Congressman Gary Condit, who became the main focus in the Chandra Levy case in 2001, after lying to investigators about his affair with Levy,” the Sonoran News story reads.

Condit’s attorney did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

Officer Joshua Aldiva, spokesman for the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, D.C., declined to comment on the Levy investigation. Associated Press reports say police never considered Condit a suspect, but there were allegations he was not forthcoming with authorities about his relationship with Levy.

Condit, who is married, eventually told police about a romance with the intern.

Condit lost his re-election bid in his Democratic primary in March 2002, after having represented the Modesto, Calif., area for 13 years.

Barr said that because Condit is a public figure, he’ll have to prove the Sonoran News story was published with actual malice and that the paper knew it was false.

Condit settled a lawsuit in March 2005 against Vanity Fair crime reporter Dominick Dunne. And Condit settled with the National Enquirer, Star and Globe tabloids in August 2004.

Contact Gary Grado by email, or phone (602) 258-1746

© 2006 All Rights Reserved. Freedom Communications, Inc.

end quote


Condit's lies are well documented in Murder on a Horse Trail. Just schedule Condit for a deposition where he has to answer questions about Chandra's disappearance under oath. That's when his lawsuits get "settled".

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
_________________
ralph@ee.net
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 Jul 24, 2006 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've seen no mention of this in the Modesto Bee. Looks like they're keeping a low profile to keep from giving Condit a chance to sue them too, for example, if they were to quote the Cave Creek paper that Condit sued for libel.

Probably won't make the news until Condit starts rope-a-doping in the deposition again, although somebody who has responsibility for Chandra's case ought to be noticing that he settles with everyone he sues before he'll answer any questions about her disappearance.

rd
_________________
ralph@ee.net
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 -> Background Information on Chandra Levy All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 2 of 10

 
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