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 Jury has reached verdict - Guilty felony murder
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11, 12  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
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9243
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

laskipper wrote:
Happy Thanksgiving to you as well Sigsky and to all the posters here on JFC!

And you are right in saying that we still have a lot to be thankful for!

"God's in His Heaven, All's Right With the World"

Robert Browning


thanks sigsky. It's been awhile since we've all been together, and yes, that's a lot to be thankful for.

Happy Thanksgiving.
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 Nov 25, 2010 12:57 am    Post subject: Thanksgiving Wishes From Rainbow Reply with quote

I found the following quotation on the Quote Garden website
http://www.quotegarden.com/thanksgiving.html

Quote:
Gratitude unlocks the fullness of life. It turns what we have into enough, and more. It turns denial into acceptance, chaos to order, confusion to clarity. It can turn a meal into a feast, a house into a home, a stranger into a friend. Gratitude makes sense of our past, brings peace for today and creates a vision for tomorrow. ~Melody Beattie



This is my wish for all of us here. May be if we take these words to heart, it will help us to make sense of the outcome of the "trial" and some of the other things that are going on in our lives.

Happy Thanksgiving everybody! Love, Rainbow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9243
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just visited the Wikipedia article on Chandra Levy and added this comment to the Talk page:

I just want to commend the authors who rewrote the Wikipedia article on Chandra Levy. It is an excellent presentation of the facts about Chandra and her murder. kudos for the good work.

Out of all the detail, I have only one small quibble which is worthy to mention in Talk but I'm not asking for a change to the article. The Justice Department lie detector test using the standard practice of utilizing a Spanish interpreter that Guandique willingly took a few months after Chandra disappeared and before she was found was originally reported as thus:

But when investigators traveled to North Carolina to interview Guandique, he denied the story - and subsequently passed a polygraph test, according to law enforcement sources. The other inmate failed the polygraph. Washington Post July 14, 2002

In September 2001, the inmate failed a polygraph test, also administered through an interpreter. Guandique, who denied involvement in the Levy case, passed, the sources said, and authorities felt comfortable that he was not their man. Washington Post September 29, 2002

The results were only later politically changed to undetermined due to the US government agenda of pinning the murder on Guandique. Undetermined was based on at first the standard use of a Spanish translator, and later before the trial the unsubstantiated claim that Guandique practiced for the test.

In any event, neither the passed or undetermined was allowed to be admitted as evidence. With such an excellent article I can live with citing the US government rewrite of history on this as they succeeded in convicting him. I obviously have my problems with what was done but that's a problem with the defense presented and neither here nor there for this article.

Again, my congratulations on a job well done. I saw something about the article being nominated for a good article, and I add my hearty support for that nomination.

Ralph Daugherty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_Levy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good idea and great comments, rd!
_________________
"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: 9243
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks jane. We're the only ones that are going to keep the truth front and center.

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



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/11/23/general-us-chandra-levy_8160639.html

excerpt:
    ....Bernie Grimm, a lawyer with the Cozen O'Connor firm who has represented high-profile defendants in D.C. Superior Court, said that while there was plenty of reasonable doubt that could have led a jury to an acquittal, he was still not surprised by the conviction.

    "The government had an overwhelmingly strong emotional case," said Grimm....

Yep - that's what justice is supposed to be based on - emotion (not!)
_________________
"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: 9243
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Similar comments was that it was felt jury wanted to give the guilty verdict to Susan Levy because she was sitting there throughout the trial.

Well, if that's the case, then everyone would be found guilty because the victim's mother is usually sitting there.

No, you really ought to have some basis for re-enacting the crime and believing that actually happened before voting guilty.

Not a one of those jurors or prosecutors could re-enact the day Chandra disappeared and even half-heartedly believe in whatever they came up with, which quite frankly, I don't know what they would come up with.

And neither do they, which in my opinion is total lack of integrity. This is how all the people freed from death row by DNA evidence were convicted.

Which should have actually happened with this trial, not twenty years later as usually happens. I think any of the big name defense lawyers would have ripped the government apart on this.

This was just a political coverup pinned on an illegal. No one of any consequence loses. Heck, even Guandique gets to stay in the country.

All it took was massive manipulation of the evidence and witnesses. I guess that's fair.

It is the government after all. I'm sure it's in our best interests. We're just not appreciative enough.

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



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Government - isn't a government by definition always good, always trustworthy, with the interests of ordinary people at heart? I have a few recent quotes to do with government I'm going to look up - from this trial and other places - gonna start a new thread in Other Viewpoints.
_________________
"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: 9243
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

from Chandra Levy Wikipedia discussion page, a comment from the moderator:

:The most in-depth [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/specials/chandra/ch10_1.html series of articles] to date from ''The Washington Post'' stated the following about Guandique's test: "The readings were inconclusive, falling into a gray area between truth and deception. But the official result, a judgment call of the polygraph examiner, was 'not deceptive.'" Either way, the apparent result was that the informant was judged to be less reliable than Guandique, and Guandique was set aside as a lead until 2009. I do agree some details are worth elaborating with clarification in the article, but how would history would be rewritten by the government about a subject this closely covered in the media? [[User:KimChee|KimChee]] ([[User talk:KimChee|talk]]) 07:35, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

History was rewritten using the Washington Post. That latest you quote is the rewritten history. It was necessary to undermine Guandique passing his lie detector test, and that he passed was unequivocal as quoted above in a prior post.

Then an anonymous source campaign was started to attack and undermine the test, using vague phrases such as "flawed test" without citing what the flaw was. This took place starting in late 2002.

Nothing was set aside until 2009. DC police starting trying to entrap Guandique in 2004 using pen pal letters, phone calls, etc., never getting any indication that he was guilty or knew anything about it but citing the letters and phone calls as Gaundique wanting to talk about the woman he killed.

There was lots of other similar evidence manipulation, directly contradicting what was found and reported at the time, such as Chandra's bracelet given to her by Condit was not actually missing but was found after seven years in her police possessions. Who found it? Same Washington Post reporter that rewrote the history on the lie detector test (and the Washington Post series in 2008).

Of course none of this belongs in an encyclopedia, but just answering your question. You have done an admirable job of admining this article through the years, especially a controversial subject such as this. A tip of my hat to you.

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



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2010 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for drawing that to our attention, rd. It's encouraging to see that there is mention of these matters by you and others at the Chandra Levy section of wiki.
_________________
"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: 3280

PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2010 2:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was going to start a government thread in Other Viewpoints, but decided to just post this here instead.

Anyway, I found it offensive when the prosecution complained that the defense was "attacking the government" by intimating that Morales' testimony had been coached. In these times when so many are intimidated by the idea of terrorism, I find the phrase "attacking the government" to be loaded with suggestion. What times we're living in, when powerful governments put on a pretense of vulnerability and cry about being attacked by puny little entities.

How dare anyone attack a government, anyway? They are such beneficent, gentle giants who long only to use their power for the loving care of every little human of good will. It made me think of a talk Obama gave awhile back where he said, "....what essentially sets a nation state apart, which is the monopoly on violence…."

The government can attack, apparently, in any way it sees fit. But must never be attacked in any way, not even by simply asking it to be accountable for its actions. Isn't that the same kind of blind loyalty demanded by Sadam Husein, Ceausecu, Stalin and their ilk?


link re Guandique defense "attacking the government"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/17/AR2010111706195.html

link to video with Obama quote (toward end of short video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpsBM1rmx-M
_________________
"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
caseinpt



Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now that I have had a chance to digest the news, two more thoughts have had me thinking that can make a case for Ingmar to be not guilty or guilty.

For the not guilty: I did not realize it until I read the news articles over and over, that he apparently killed Chandra FIRST and then assaulted those two other girls. Now if someone just killed somebody AND left the body in the park, would he/she hang out there immediately after and assault two more? Heck no, even the most craziest folks would not do that. You probably would stay low for a long, long time--especially anywhere near the crime scene area. I wonder if the defense made any attempt to introduce that unlikelihood into their case.

For the guilty, did Ingmar actually state he saw Chandra in the park that day? That is very self-incriminating to me. The odds that he saw her and remembered seeing her seem very disturbing to me since she supposedly rarely ever visit that park. I have trouble reconciling that admission by Ingmar if true.

My 3 cents:-)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9243
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're absolutely right. We pointed out those inconsistentcies with both Guandique and Chandra. They are numerous and span pages to describe. The jury got no inkling of any of that. One article said half of them didn't even remember 2001 and they seemed to be mostly concerned about giving the Levys something to go home with.

Not only is what you say correct, caseinpt, but the jury doesn't know that six days later Guandique ran out of an apartment he was burglarizing for jewelry rather than assault the woman. That and subsequent assaults on the joggers was his pattern, not the earlier staged murder scene with Chandra.

It is a travesty of justice, and mybe defense lawyers don't think juries can handle information. I don't know, but they should have been keenly aware of what they were voting on, and they weren't.

Concerning Guandique's many statements according to police, number one I don't trust the DC police in what they say about it. They are not only liars but proud of it. They think it's a cute trick.

Number two is Guandique was dealing with at a minimum one of the policemen as translator. These police were concerned with only one thing, how to trick and confuse Guandique. They could be throwing all sorts of things out and then saying Guandique said this or that. They are worthless, as was this verdict it was based on.

Bottom line, unless there was a transcribed discovery proceeding, these DC police, the same ones that weren't even trusted to be called to the stand, are basically not trustworthy. They had an agenda, and even lawyers can't stop a government bent on personal destruction.

They intended to destroy Guandique, and took all ten years of his sentence to do it, then tricked a jury into giving him life for the same crimes he had just served ten years for.

Cute tricks and lies. That's justice in Washington DC.

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



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-opinions/2010/11/miracle_conviction_or_one_more.html
Op ed piece from WP about lack of evidence
_________________
"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: 9243
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

At this point, I'm wondering how much of the trial record is public domain?

From what I checked earlier, I believe the trial transcript is purchasable from the court recorder. I need to check on that.

We need to also check on whether submitted exhibits are available. And if not whether a FOIA is required to make ALL the evidence available. Including a note on cerebral hemmorhage found on Chandra's kitchen counter.

I wouldn't be surprised to get a lot of resistance from those scoundrels in DC on releasing stuff they wouldn't even show the defense attorneys until last minute, if ever. But they've short circuited justice for Chandra, and we'll have to see what it takes to shine a spotlight on the dirt under their dirty deed.

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 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 10 of 12

 
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