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 ... , 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
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good, rd - it would be so informative.
_________________
"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: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:52 pm    Post subject: Guandique Case Docs Reply with quote

Recent Documents in U.S. vs. Guandique


http://www.dccourts.gov/dccourts/about/media/us_v_guandique.jsp
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jane



Joined: 22 Sep 2002
Posts: 3280

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's great, Rainbow. Needless to say, the stuff released so far isn't the most tantalizing stuff.

http://www.dccourts.gov/dccourts/docs/current/2009_CF1_9230/2010-09-09%20MotionToQuashSubpoena.pdf

This is the prosecution saying the defense can't subpoena a police officer and notes relating to a police interview of Ingmar Guandique Sept. 9, 2008, stating that in order to properly subpoena, they must first show relevance (but how can they show relevance without first having access?)
_________________
"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
MrRich



Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 54
Location: Tulsa, Ok

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

caseinpt wrote:
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:-)


Didn't Guandique say that he didn't know she was dead until much later? If so there would be no reason for him to "lay low".
_________________
All things being equal, the simplest answer is usually best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9240
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

According to the prosecutors, and the jury quite moved by it, Chandra was tied up with her clothes and her mouth stuffed with leaves and mud.

He was convicted of murder because of that. And caseinpt is right.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9240
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 4:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is an interesting comment on stocktrades101.com:

The reason I am so interested in this case all of a sudden is that I am required to analyze it for a class. I am primarily using a 12 chapter Washington Post series found on the internet, a book called "Murder on a horse trail" by Ralph Daugherty and official documents such as the affidavit I mentioned. The series leans towards Guandique, while the book is a collection of lots of evidence, and has a lot more "how come" type stuff about Condit.

This commenter should have received a good grade. Couldn't agree more with the appraisal.

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 Dec 04, 2010 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's good to see, isn't it!
_________________
"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: 9240
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is, jane, good to see Murder on a Horse Trail used in analysis of the case and interesting that it was an educational project.

We do strive to be educational, that's for sure.

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



Joined: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 209
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://womenincrimeink.blogspot.com/2010/12/where-is-outrage.html

I don't know who Pat Brown is or what credibility she may have, but my view of the trial result is very close to hers. Note she has an alternative suspect, one Walt Williams, who sounds like almost as good a potential convictee as Guandique. If we have heard of him before, I don't remember.
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: Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:37 pm    Post subject: Pat Brown Reply with quote

Great article, Sigsky! I believe that Pat Brown has a lot of credibility and I am also shocked at the lack of a public show of outrage!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sigsky



Joined: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 209
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After a bit of further research I see that Walt Williams is a suspect in a completely different case. Sorry if I mislead anyone.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9240
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't heard that name in Chandra's case, sigsky. How did Pat Brown bring it up in terms of outrage?

And yeah, I don't think very many people are buying the government's claims, but I think El Salvador has to express the outrage that will do any good, the same as US does for similar treatment by our citizens by Iran.

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: Mon Dec 06, 2010 4:57 pm    Post subject: Who is Pat Brown? Reply with quote

Pat Brown-Wikipedia bio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Brown_(criminal_profiler)


Quote:

Brown was born in New Jersey and moved with her family to Virginia at age 9. She has lived in Maryland since 1982.

Education
In 1981, she graduated with a liberal arts degree from the University of the State of New York. In 2007, she received her master’s degree in criminal justice from Boston University.[1]

Career
After having once rented a room to a murder suspect, Brown was moved to become an investigative criminal profiler. By 1996, she'd founded The Sexual Homicide Exchange (SHE). In 2000, she opened The Pat Brown Criminal Profiling Agency.[2] Today, she is one of the few women criminal profilers, assisting police departments and victims' families by analyzing physical and behavioral evidence to make determinations about crime behavior, suspects and motive.[3]

Since it was founded, The Sexual Homicide Exchange has offered profiling and investigative services at no cost to law enforcement. The Sexual Homicide Exchange is also home to The Society for Investigative Criminal Profiling, which works toward deductive profiling and establishing practice standards for criminal profilers.

Brown wrote about her criminological approach in The Profiler: My Life Hunting Serial Killers and Psychopaths [4] with co-author Bob Andelman. She also wrote about the psychology of predators in Killing for Sport: Inside the Minds of Serial Killers.[5] In addition, she is a co-founder of and a regular contributor to Women in Crime Ink,[6] described by the Wall Street Journal as "a blog worth reading."[7]

Brown has provided crime commentary, profiling, and forensic analysis on national and international TV and radio. She regularly appears on CNN, MSNBC,[8][9] FOX, NBC and CBS and is a frequent guest on the "Today," "The Early Show," "Nancy Grace," Jane Velez-Mitchell, HLN "Prime News,"[10] FOX TV’s “America’s Most Wanted,” and “The Montel Williams Show.” For four seasons, she profiled crimes on the weekly Court TV crime show, “I, Detective.”[11][12] She was the host of Discovery Channel’s 2004 documentary The Mysterious Death of Cleopatra.[13] And she consulted, as well as appeared as a featured profiler, on "Jack the Ripper" (2010) for The Mystery Files.[14]

Brown was a writer for The Crime Library,[15] and a content contributor for the 2005 home DVD edition of Profiler: Season Two and the 2006 DVD release of Quentin Tarantino’s crime classic Reservoir Dogs.[16]

In May 2010, Ann Curry with NBC's the Today Show," interviewed Brown about her latest book, The Profiler.[17]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rainbow



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

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:14 pm    Post subject: Pat Brown's Outrage Reply with quote

Hi Sigsky and Rd!
Here is the excerpt from http://womenincrimeink.blogspot.com/2010/12/where-is-outrage.html Sigsky and Rd were referring to:

Women in Crime Ink
Monday, December 6, 2010
Where is the Outrage?
by Pat Brown

Quote:
I doubt we can find very many people who feel bad for Ingmar
Guandique, the man convicted of killing Chandra Levy. My own heart is not bleeding for him. On the other hand, my brain is about to explode. Why am I hearing no outcry about this frightening guilty verdict that the jury arrived at after an incredibly short trial with pitiful evidence? It is hard to see how any prosecutor would have even wanted to try this case with what he had to work with. It is horrifying that a jury would convict on emotion rather than solid facts. As much as I have never been totally enamored with the Innocence Project's overuse of DNA to disqualify all other solid evidence, they and I agree that this miracle conviction is a stomach-turning travesty. While Guandique is hardly innocent, as far as criminal matters go, he did attack two women and has a history of other criminal activities. Past criminal activities of an individual do not prove a similar criminal activity is that individual's doing unless evidence proves it so.


And. . .

Quote:
No witnesses put Guandique on the trail at the time Levy was theoretically murdered. No evidence was found in Guandique's home linking him to the murder. Guandique, a known thief, did not steal Levy's ring or her Walkman. The only DNA evidence from the crime scene came from Levy's leggings, and, although it was from a male, it did not match Guandique. There was no videotaped confession with details only the killer would know. In fact, the details of the supposed confession Guandique made to his prison mate were not very convincing. Guandique passed the polygraph.Recap: DNA from the crime scene does not match Guandique and nothing else links him to Levy's murder.
Why are we not all raising hell over this? Guandique could have committed the crime, but so could Condit or one of his buddies, and so could I, for that matter. We really don't know if Guandique is guilty (and neither does that jury), and we don't know if Chandra Levy's murderer is still at large. This is not justice.

Finally,

Quote:
Before you start labeling this theory ridiculous and not worthy to be presented in a court of law, go back and look over the evidence that got Guandique convicted of Chandra Levy's murder. There isn't any.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9240
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for that, Rainbow. Pat Brown is certainly right. She got one detail wrong, Chandra's ring was missing, however it wasn't pawned or given to his girlfriend.

Guandique was actively seeking things to steal and sell for drugs, he broke into a neighborhood apartment six days after Chandra disappeared and fled with a ring when the apartment resident, a woman returned with him there. He didn't assault her, tie her up with her clothes, murder her. He fled, and was caught by police soon after the woman called 911.

Pat Brown is certainly right, and the jury has no inkling of any of this, the sequence, the conditions of what happened, why Chandra wasn't anywhere out of contact with Condit. That is attributable to a failed justice system to protect poor people from being nailed for life sentence and death sentence crimes based on hearsay and a government bent on clearing this murder out of the halls of Congress, and defense lawyers just as bad, keeping the jury ignorant of all these facts, in addition to not knowing he was an illegal immigrant, was not homeless, had almost completed the severe ten year sentence for the crimes described by the two victims in testimony at the trial, and had been working around the time that Chandra disappeared.

In fact, in the Washington Post series, the employer claimed to have laid Gaundique off that very day. None of that was drilled into by the defense lawyers. Nor did they care to go into all this detail, not to mention the vast detail needed to understand Chandra's behavior nor even the crime scene and surrounding area. One day. They didn't prove it. We rest.

Pat Brown has the expertise to understand this. The jurors would have, had they been completely informed as was called for and deemed absolutely necessary all along. But no, let's not talk about Guandique, let's not put him on the stand after explaining everything, and ensure he communicated with the jury exactly what happened. No, lawyers don't do that. Let's keep the jury ignorant.

Well, we saw what an ignorant jury does. And it ain't justice for Chandra.

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 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 11 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