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 

Guandique trial
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Murder on a Horse Trail
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9218
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

James Anderson wrote:
Alexander says that "Mrs. Levy isn't entirely convinced that Condit was not involved in her daughter's murder, even though police and prosecutors have said he was not a suspect."

I don't think Chandra's family would be disappointed if Guandique is found not guilty. They might actually be relieved that the REAL killer could still be brought to justice.

He also says that "Prosecutors have a very difficult job ahead of them in proving Guandique is the right guy. There is no forensic evidence, no eyewitnesses and only alleged confessions he made to his fellow inmates about killing Levy."

The only reason they have a difficult job ahead of them is because there is NO PROOF that Guandique had anything to do with this, and plenty of proof to indicate he didn't. The ONLY thing they have going for them is a judge who is obviously biased against the defense, the entire Washington power structure that has been trying to obscure the facts that indicate a sitting congressman killed his girlfriend for the last nine years, and a friendly media that willfully ignores the facts that prove Guandique's innocence and Condit's guilt.

I also found this in an AP story quoting attorney George Jackson, a Chicago-based lawyer with the Polsinelli Shughart law firm and a former federal prosecutor:

"Jackson said the defense (for Guandique) will have to tread lightly because jurors will be put off if they sense attorneys are trying to make an innocent man (Condit!) into a scapegoat. And the government will surely be ready to counter suggestions that Condit was involved. But because Condit is so closely linked to the case in the public's eye, the defense has some leeway to approach the issue with subtlety. If it's feasible to suggest that this guy (Condit) may have been involved, you put it out there" to help create reasonable doubt in a jury's mind, Jackson said. "But it's a dangerous thing to do because you don't know if there will be a backlash."

Exactly who is turning "an innocent man into a scapegoat" here? Also, If the defense is serious about defending Guandique why would they say they only need one day to present their defense? Not admitting the results of the lie detector tests was bad enough, and now this?



I couldn't agree more, James. Your analysis is spot on.

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



Joined: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 208
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good points James,

I may be naive, but given that the prosecution case is based solely on some incidents that could fit a scenario that might explain the crime, and some jailhouse informants whose buttons are easily pushed, but with no physical evidence whatsoever, I'm not surprised that the defense presentation is expected to be brief. I'm not sure what needs to be said other than the prosecution has not met the burden of proof. Should be very interesting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9218
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think James and jane are right, sigsky. It's a major mistake to say they didn't prove anything, defense rests.

They cannot assume there is reasonable doubt, they must demonstrate it.

There are shadings of how you do that, with minimum being shedding doubt on character and motive of cellmate confession witnesses, which is all there is to the case. (When I tell people this they are astonished.)

The maximum would be to present a more compelling circumstantial case for Chandra's murder than Guandique's circumstantial case, and by more compelling I mean a full scale presentation of facts of a circumstantial case involving motive and means of being disappeared as a threat to Condit's career.

I doubt defense would do that unless necessary, but the middle ground is to suggest other possibilities including domestic violence.

I'm not a fan of suggestions with no clear cut scenario on why they raise substantial reasonable doubt, and that takes more than a day.

I'm happy with two things I've seen so far. The public defenders have suggested in a prior hearing that they believe Chandra was brought and dumped in the park, which is fundamental to defending justice for Chandra.

The other is in an AP report today. One potential juror said they felt Condit was unfairly targeted. A defense lawyer asked the potential juror whether they would be willing to consider evidence Condit was involved.

Alexander in Washington Post and Doyle in McClatchy report with a direct quote:

"What if there was evidence that Gary Condit may have been involved?"

I think these indicate a robust defense, more than Guandique wasn't proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, defense rests, but it will take more than a day to do it right.

Details need to be made clear to understand why Chandra wasn't jogging in Rock Creek Park.

rd

Defense atty in Levy trial asks juror about Condit
The Associated Press
October 20, 2010

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_16387204


In Levy case, survey answers lead to dismissals of more prospective jurors
By Keith L. Alexander
Washington Post Staff Writer
October 20, 2010

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/20/AR2010102005220.html


Jury selection continues in Chandra Levy murder trial
By MICHAEL DOYLE
McClatchy Newspapers
October 20, 2010

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/10/20/2336296/jury-selection-continues-in-chandra.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3278

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rd is correct that the prosecution's case hinges mainly on the testimony of convicted felons; however there are also Witnesses 2 and 3 from the warrant for Guandique's arrest:

    On or about May 1, 2001, at approximately 2:00 p.m., a witness (hereafter W2), who is a young Caucasian female, was walking alone on the Western Ridge Trail in the Park. W2 believes that she entered the Park at Porter Street, N.W., in the vicinity of Pierce Mill. As W2 reached an isolated and wooded part of the trail, slightly east of the Klingle Mansion, she noticed a lone Hispanic male, walking in the woods, parallel to W2’s route. According to W2, the Hispanic male just appeared, suddenly, to her right. W2, feeling uncomfortable, slowed down, hoping that the Hispanic male would simply pass by her. As W2 watched, the Hispanic male walked ahead through the woods, joined another trail, and disappeared around the corner. W2, more at ease but still cautious, decided to take a detour, leaving the trail the Hispanic male had taken. W2 veered off and began climbing a steep incline, walking deeper into the woods. Within a minute, W2 again sensed someone in the woods. W2 turned and saw that the Hispanic male had somehow circled around and was now directly behind her on the hillside in the woods. As W2 watched, the Hispanic male came toward her and closed the distance to within ten feet. At that point, W2 panicked. W2 ran off the path and down the hill, jumping over logs and through the woods, until she reached a road outside of the Park. Once she felt safe, W2 turned around to locate the Hispanic male, who was no longer in sight.

    That night, W2 told another witness (hereafter W3) about what happened in the Park. Neither W2 nor W3 thought to report the incident to the police. Shortly thereafter, W2 left the country and did not think anything more about the events in question until May 2002. At that time, W2 was out of the country, but saw a newspaper article that contained a photograph of Ingmar Guandique. Upon seeing the photograph, W2 immediately thought that the photograph of Guandique looked like the man who followed her in the Park a year earlier. Then, in May 2003, while back in the United states, W2 saw a television broadcast about the Levy case that included a picture of Guandique and that also asked for anyone with information to contact the police. Once again, upon seeing Guandique’s picture, W2 immediately thought that he looked just like the man who followed her in the Park back in 2001. To the best of her ability, W2 now believes the date of the incident in the Park occurred hours before a dinner with W3. By referring to its day planner from 2001, W3 believes the day in question to be May 1, 2001, which would place defendant Ingmar Guandique in the Park on the Western Ridge Trail, shortly before Chandr Levy disappeared.

_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9218
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, and that's what the five weeks are about, presenting various witnesses like you mention from the affadavit, but for example the woman who will testify that she saw Chandra in Rock Creek Park around May 1 is just to reasonably establish that Chandra was in Rock Creek Park jogging to be murdered by Guandique.

It's like it's not definite but it's out there. Can't be proved, can't be disproved, part of the death by 1000 cuts.

That's why it's critical to show why Chandra wasn't jogging in Rock Creek Park or anywhere else, precisely because questioning how certain the lady was that she saw Chandra doesn't cut it as part of saying there's a reasonable doubt all those 1000 cuts don't prove Guandique is guilty.

Preponderance of unprovable nor disprovable witness testimony adds up to momentum to say there must be something to this, look at all these people testifying every thing was in place to happen as they have charged.

In my opinion, questioning whether there really was a cut 1000 times isn't nearly as compellling as saying there was a 1000 cuts.

That means you have to do more than cast doubt on each witness. You have to show why the whole prosecution premise is fundamentally flawed, which takes nearly as long as the prosecution presenting the premise.

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



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 870
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:30 pm    Post subject: Discovery ID Channel Reply with quote

If I recall correctly, Santha was having difficulty getting discovery relating to the ENTIRE (including original) investigation, from the prosecution. This would be extremely important to the defense's case.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sigsky



Joined: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 208
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:47 pm    Post subject: Gary Condit's side of the story Reply with quote

I love this one from Michael Doyle, TTOFTMAOKCL indeed.

http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/law/2010/10/chandra-levy-murder-trial-1021-gary-condits-side-of-the-story.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rainbow



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 870
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:21 pm    Post subject: Discovery of Discovery Reply with quote

Would it be/would it have been possible to subpoena his manuscript as part of the discovery process?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3278

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Would it be/would it have been possible to subpoena his manuscript as part of the discovery process?
Oooo - wouldn't that be cool if they could do that? But I have a feeling it's just a big manila envelope stuffed with a sheaf of blank paper. In a safe, so no one knows...
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ


Last edited by jane on Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3278

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

According to Alan Lengel, Condit's attorney, Fields, said the book was a Shakespearean drama. Maybe Nothing About Much Doodoo? (Well, I tried...)
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rainbow



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 870
Location: THE LEFT COAST

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:52 pm    Post subject: Dueling Wits Reply with quote

En garde! Touche!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9218
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Funny stuff, sigsky. For readers wondering what Doyle's acronym is:

The trial of the man accused of killing Chandra Levy (which henceforth should, but won't be, abbreviated to TTOFTMAOKCL) resumes Thursday at 2 p.m.

end quote

Coverage these days with blogs means lots of small timely releases of info. Good for thorough coverage, lots of work to stay on top of. Michael Doyle's blogs are listed to the right at the link above, and there's a TBD.com twitter feed from a good ex-API reporter to also stay on top of.

We'll throw our analysis in here as well.

On to justice for Chandra.

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



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3278

PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just noticed this example of inaccuracy in a CNN blog:
    ....A jogger found Levy’s body in Rock Creek Park in 2002....

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/15/fridays-intriguing-people-29/
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3278

PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is a link to an interesting CBS video http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=671700n
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9218
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah, jane, as the pedestrian newswriters start some coverage on this their lack of knowledge and understanding and especially their widely held erroneous beliefs mislead everyone else, including other reporters like them. It so self-perpetuating the public comes to believe it as common knowledge.

Like the egregiously erroneous statement that Chandra was jogging in Rock Creek Park, this one that a jogger found her reinforces that. Chandra must have been jogging, a jogger found her. So wrong on all counts. And I doubt you could get through to one of these reporters for them to understand what they're doing wrong.

Try substituting "a jogger found her" with "an animal bone hunter who frequented Rock Creek Park daily but hadn't been in that section where Chandra was found in five years noticed his dog sniffing at something under leaves and found her skull".

Doesn't roll off the tongue quite as easily but the price you pay for actual reporting.

Another example is one of those quickie blog posters at the Washington Post described Chandra as Condit's intern. To the Washington Post's credit, they lined it out and replaced it with something like "recently completed internship at Bureau of Prisons" so that readers could catch the change if they checked back.

Good catch, jane. I'm sure we'll be busy as usual keeping the facts straight.

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 -> Murder on a Horse Trail All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
Page 3 of 26

 
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