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 

The question still is, Who killed Chandra

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Chandra Levy and missing women
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
benn



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

PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:49 pm    Post subject: The question still is, Who killed Chandra Reply with quote

I think that I typed too long of a message. I have forgotten how long messages can be. I may lose this message entirely. When I tried to post it the messageboard said that I had to have permission to blog--from Yukon I guess. Someone up their must be trying to protect a suspect. benn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gozgals



Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 2892
Location: A Place Called Vertigo

PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HI Benn:

Your note was probably not that long but we tend to lose them sometimes.

I hate when that happens because I usually don't back mine up either so I normally don't even spellcheck my posts in fear of losing them.

I can see what you were going to ask about.

Maybe you can try to remember the highlights of your post and re-post it in instead of a whole letter. That might help. Maybe the major points you wanted to make.

Have a good evening and good to see you.

Goz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
laskipper



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

PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good to see your post, Benn! Hope you are doing well?

Sorry to say that 7 years later, we still don't know for certain who killed Chandra. These days, I'm afraid to even venture a guess (lawsuits).

Sometimes in this life, even if the culprit doesn't get charged for a crime, he gets punished in other ways. Ways that are hurtful to the person (perp).

Case in point- OJ Simpson. Everyone with a brain knew who killed Nicole and Ron. OJ's team got him off the hook, but he doesn't have anything left that remotely resembles his previous life. Not the fame, the friends or the money. Now, he may be on his way to prison for some petty crime (compared to a double murder).

AS to Gary Condit, not saying he is guilty of murder, but nevertheless, look what has happened to his life in the past years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Condit

Sonoran News defamation of character

In July 2006, Condit sued the Sonoran News, a free weekly circular, for defamation of character, after the publication wrote "that Condit was the 'main focus in the Chandra Levy case in 2001, after lying to investigators about his affair with Levy.'"[16]

The case was dismissed in July 2007 when the judge ruled that Condit had not proved the statement was false, or that the paper had published it with actual malice.


Then:

Baskin Robbins franchises revoked

and:

Children prosecuted for PAC fraud

Not to mention the obvious- he lost his seat in Congress

Point is, his life is not what it once was.

Again, good to see you, Benn!

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: Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pawning it off on Guandique is what concerns me. For those that haven't absorbed and studied the details, and that includes the DC Police, on the face of it it seems logical to think that someone who attacked joggers in the area before and after Chandra disappeared, including holding a knife to their throats and going over the side of a hill with one of them, is a natural candidate for her murder.

Details, however, make it impossible for Guandique to have done this. Those details need to include the person making that judgement to retrace the steps and re-enact the crime as they envision Guandique to have done before coming to that conclusion.

Therein lies the details, and none who perform due diligence with diligence will arrive at that conclusion. The question is whether there will ever be any such diligence demonstrated on Chandra's behalf.

rd

click to read the online true crime mystery novel Murder on a Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy

www.justiceforchandra.com home page
Back to top
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 Jul 07, 2008 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello rd, I am going to quote one of the last sentences that you posted here: "

New postPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:50 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Pawning it off on Guandique is what concerns me. For those that haven't absorbed and studied the details, and that includes the DC Police, on the face of it it seems logical to think that someone who attacked joggers in the area before and after Chandra disappeared, including holding a knife to their throats and going over the side of a hill with one of them, is a natural candidate for her murder.

Details, however, make it impossible for Guandique to have done this. Those details need to include the person making that judgement to retrace the steps and re-enact the crime as they envision Guandique to have done before coming to that conclusion.

Therein lies the details, and none who perform due diligence with diligence will arrive at that conclusion. The question is whether there will ever be any such diligence demonstrated on Chandra's behalf.

rd "

That is sort of what I began writing about yesterday. I opened up my browser and on the front page was a news item about the FBI revealing some of its surveillance secrets. I tried to copy the link down here but did not succeed.

What the story about the FBI brought to my mind was the thought, "How does the FBI not surveille, when it decides not to surveille? This is my own original question, and not from the browser news.

In the case of your G non suspect rd I got a prompt reply from the head of the Public Defender's office back when those things were making news. The Head Public Defender wrote that the Investigators always were quick to jump on Guandique whenever things got slow on the investigation,. That sounds that the Public Defender in Washington, D.C. was doing his job. I am going to stop here on this message and start another one so as not to chance getting cut short. I have more to say
benn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



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

PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yes, the prosecutor you communicated with was right. Time after time the DC Police floated Gaundique out there when any pressure was put on them to indicate what they were doing about Chandra's murder.

Guandique is convenient, but the details for those that are willing to take a close look at them make him in particular and park stalkers as a genre impossible.

Chandra could only have been brought up to the top of that hill by car, and very unlikely alive and during broad daylight as the picnic table is just too close to the narrow road to avoid being seen.

I had hoped that someone in Modesto would have looked at this close enough to know that when their detective was rebuffed and sent back home from DC and told not to investigate, there was a reason for that.

But someone from Modesto will have to find out why.

rd
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: Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I started another message but did not succeed. I think we have a new phenomenon in the computer industry, something not much talked about. (I am laughing right now as I write this. Laughing is supposed to be good for one trying to preserve good health in old age, or young age, and I seem to laugh a lot these days. The thing that is making me laugh is none of those bad things like virsuses or worms or spyware, or anything nasty like that but perhaps a man made hidden software called the "earthquake." That is a manmade, and perhaps invisible, bit of software that is designed to do just one thing, immitate a small earthquake. Just when I get to the important words in my message, there is a sudden jiggling of the computer, and before I can get to the end of my message, the message has been all jiggled away. So my work for this evening is done. Maybe tomorrow night I will try again.

That is the way I found the FBI news story this morning about how they sometimes surveille when they are investigating a case. My screen jiggled (no real earthquake but only the screen jiggling). Then the FBI disclosure appeared.
benn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
benn



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

PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that i may have found out why my computer jiggles, or simulates an earthquake. I keep my computer magnifier on to help me see, and the magnifer seems capable of jiggling everything all around.

I will throw in one more clue here. The DC police requested the FBI to help them question a witness in Modesto County. Much better would have been for the Modesto County law enforment agencies to question the witness. The FBI could not locate the desired witness and eventually left without talking to the witness.

About the same time the FBI looked for the witness a newspaper reporter in Modesto County apparently knew approximately where the witness was. I don't remember if the reporter actually talked to the potential witness or not.

Was that surveillance by the FBI or not? Maybe the FBI might have decided that the wanted witness was too young to question, or they could hae been protecting the privacy of the witness.

I shall return, probably this evening, but we do not have General Douglas McArthur to help us anymore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
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
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