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 defense in October to focus on Condit 'rough sex'
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  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: 9240
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I think that the convicted serial rapist who was raping women in the same park the body was found in is a better suspect than the kinky congressman.

While Guandique committed serious crimes and was sentenced and served 10 years in Federal prison for them, they were assaults on two joggers, as in knocking them down, choking them, etc.

Fortunately each of them fought him off and we can speculate the intent was rape, but that didn't happen, he wasn't convicted of rape, he was not a serial rapist, etc. They were serious physical assaults however, and ten years in Federal prison is a major sentence, but convicted serial rapist is an exaggeration.

In addition Chandra didn't exercise outdoors, ever, and didn't even run on a treadmill in her gym, and wasn't out galavanting around to be attacked in any event. It's like if you dump the body of a women in a remote woods, she must have got herself there to be murdered. Even if they don't jog. But of course.
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: Fri May 20, 2016 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Especially after the detectives reviewed her computer searches and discovered that she had done some searches on that exact part of Rock Creek Park the morning of her disappearance.

There was a Rock Creek Park link associated with a Washington Post page as I understand it, the only "place" involved was that Rock Creek Park was listed as being at the address of park headquarters, Klingle Mansion.

There was no detailed map, and certainly nothing concerning the area where Chandra was found, on the side of a hill above Broad Branch on the other side of hill from Beach Drive where joggers jog and Guandique assaulted two women.

If you had walked from Klingle Mansion to Glover Road, or even from Beach Drive up and over to above Broad Branch, you would know that "that exact part of the park" isn't exactly exact. Plus no map anyway. It was a big green blob that said Rock Creek Park.

This was accompanied by hours of searching on Condit and family that morning and night before, so either you can say gee I need a break, I'll look at what Washington Post recommends for activities or that she got the message she was waiting for and it mentioned Rock Creek Park.

You be Chandra, and figure it out.
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: Fri May 20, 2016 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And by the way, nothing was reported at the time about the other women.

Everything mentioned was reported at the time, in great detail, by the Washington Post among others. Allan Lengel was the top notch Post reporter on it. Names are being suppressed in these reports but all the info is in Washington Post archives and examined in depth by others. All on the web.

Where do you think lawyers get this info? Some want to suppress it. They work for the government. Go figure.
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: Fri May 20, 2016 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is possible to walk to the area in Rock Creek where Levy's body was found - I have done it on occasion, there are several nearby trails. But to carry a body there to dispose of, unnoticed, would be virtually impossible.

That's correct. That's why it takes a car, at night, backing in next to picnic table 18. I sat there and typed up my take on it when I went to go take a look.

My words sitting at that picnic table were:

"As far as Guandique goes, I think what we have to do is emphasize what the police have overlooked; that this location is based on ease of access by car to remote woods. There are more remote spots, but they aren't next to a backup drive for unloading horses as there is next to picnic area 18. Not only is this spot easy to drive up to, it is ideal for pulling off the road into the trees and unloading something unseen after dusk when the park is closed."
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 May 21, 2016 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

McClatchy's Michael Doyle has an excellent report on the proceedings Wednesday, link below. Some highlights:

Public Defender Jonathan Anderson filed brief linking Condit and Chandra wiith “DNA and serological evidence” and that Condit had powerful motive to either kill Chandra and/or cover up circumstances of her death, whether death was intentional or accidental.

(this refers to Condit's semen found on Chandra's panties in her dirty clothes at her apartment when her apartment was searched)

Defense wants to establish a link between past experiences with other women with bondage sex and Chandra being found with her tights in knots.

(Doyle does a great job of linking information from multiple filings. Whereas Wednesday's filings did not include names but were referred to as W-1, W-2, etc., previous filings did establish some names that were of interest to the case. We've posted previously in this thread on those reports, and again in this article the women are named from previous filings as Anne Marie Smith, Joleen McKay, and Sue Borges Rossi.)

Defense granted permission to depose one woman due to her medical condition. A quote from an FBI interview was included where she recounted a bout of “aggressive sex” and "felt scared".

(this is Anne Marie Smith based on the quotes. I hope her medical condition isn't serious. She basically singlehandedly broke open this case. Basically because she was scared she'd end up like Chandra.)

Defense was not granted permission to depose another woman who was quoted as telling FBI that "Mr. Condit expressed a preference for an iron bed with posts for bondage purposes”. Ruling was that she could testify at trial.

(this would be Joleen McKay. She called FBI from her Bay area home when the news about Chandra being linked to Condit hit national news and urged the FBI to search Condit's condo. DC prosecutors refused to get warrant for it and Condit was protected from the very beginning. Of course he used Constitutional separation of powers to make himself immune from law enforcement as well.)

Defense was denied permission to depose a third woman with an older history with Condit.

(this would be Sue Rossi, and both a good defense to include and a good ruling to exclude her. It established more history of bondage sex but much prior to Chandra)

Defense was denied permission to depose Condit's driver

(this is Vince Flammini. This again is a good defense, and a good ruling. Flammini establishes that he took Condit to see these women, so the he said, she said thing is averted, but that's about it. The fact that defense establishes that they will call upon anyone that establishes their contentions should put to bed lawyers trying to hand wave off the testimony as "nuts and sluts" as Condit did with Chandra when Chandra disappeared.)

This is exactly the defense that needed to be done, it's a start anyway, there's more, and my hat's off to Anderson the lawyer and Doyle the reporter.

rd


http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article78656457.html
Gary Condit’s sex life goes to court in hearing on Chandra Levy’s murder
By Michael Doyle
McClatchy News
May 19, 2016
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 May 21, 2016 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Keith Alexander of Washington Post has some other details from the filing in his article (link below).

The statements to the FBI by these women were not provided to Guandique's first defense team. US prosecutors deemed the information not relevant, and they questioned the credibility of one of the women.

(yet they don't question the credibility of Condit. Well that tells you everything you wanted to know about these DC prosecutors. This judge ordered the government to provide the defense with "reams of evidence", according to Alexander.)

"Aggressive sex involving bondage is not an entirely safe activity, and Mr. Condit would have had a powerful motive to dispose of Ms. Levy's remains - and her tights that had been tied into knots - if she died during sexual activity with Mr. Condit."

(Alexander provides the quintessential reasoning of Anderson for this defense of Guandique from the filing.)

One woman told FBI she and Condit had "aggressive sex" a few months before Chandra disappeared and that Condit displayed a desire to tie her up with articles of clothing. She also said that Condit's then-attorney tried to get her to sign a false affadavit that she did not have a romantic relationship with Condit. She refused to sign it.

(Ann Marie told the FBI Condit wanted to tie her up with clothing but she didn't reveal that in interviews. She dd say there were things that she wasn't talking about, referred to his closet, and this was definitely one of those things. She also spoke of the false affadavit attempt by Condit.)

The second woman told the FBI Condit liked to tie her up during sex and about the iron bed with posts for bondage purposes. She became scared of Condit and attempted to contact FBI anonymously because she feared repercussions from him for telling the FBI about their relationship.

(he preferred an iron bed? because wooden posts break too easily? That's experience talking I guess.)

Well believe it or not, this is a trial of Condit inside of a trial of Guandique which by extension is a trial of Chandra Levy.

I'll bet the government suppressors of truth minions will drop charges against Guandique before that happens.

rd


https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/attorneys-for-man-charged-with-killing-chandra-levy-say-gary-condit-has-history-of-aggressive-sex/2016/05/19/202a27c0-1dcd-11e6-9c81-4be1c14fb8c8_story.html
Attorneys for man charged with killing Chandra Levy say Gary Condit has history of ‘aggressive sex’
By Keith L. Alexander
Washington Post
May 19, 2016
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: Sun May 22, 2016 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

from Washington Post comments:
I don't know much about Condit but this story giving a strong implication that he killed Levy seems like irresponsible press charges based on very slim evidence. I don't approve of people effectively tried in the press this way.

That's a fair point, but you ought to have seen the coverage of Guandique prior to his first trial. He was tried and convicted in the Washington Post (by other reporters). I'm still trying to determine who the employer was that was quoted as saying that Guandique didn't show up for work the day Chandra disappeared.

In addition, this article is simply a report of a legal filing requesting depositions for the upcoming trial. All the information is in the legal filing, so if it sounds like being tried it's because the defense intends to show that the circumstances point to Condit, not Guandique. After all, circumstances is all there is. There is no evidence whatsoever for either man. For that matter, there is no circumstances that Chandra would have taken up outdoor exercising on the day she disappeared other than her body was found dumped in a remote area. Circumstances. Implications. Only now starting to understand the implications of what happened because a defense is pointing it out.
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 May 23, 2016 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Washington Post
May 19, 2016
by Keith L. Alexander


The statements by these women were not provided to Guandique's first defense team. US prosecutors deemed the information not relevant and they questioned the credibility of one of the women.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/attorneys-for-man-charged-with-killing-chandra-levy-say-gary-condit-has-history-of-aggressive-sex/2016/05/19/202a27c0-1dcd-11e6-9c81-4be1c14fb8c8_story.html

Hi, everybody! Thank you so much rd for posting and commenting on all of these latest news updates on the case. I am so astonished to hear that Guandique's first defense team was not provided with all of the statements made by potential witnesses in the investigation and wonder what other evidence was not disclosed to the original Guandique defense team. I am curious as to the role that law enforcement played in any potential cover-up of the truth. It also sounds like there was extreme interference and prejudice on the part of the prosecution. Other potential witness(es) who were interviewed by the DC police department, the Levy's private investigators, and the FBI were given the impression in telephone calls that law enforcement and investigators gave great credibility to the women who had come forward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sigsky



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

PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2016 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello everyone, nice to hear from you.

I'm still keeping an eye on the story because I knew there was going to be a retrial, but I thought the only outcome might be that the Guandique murder conviction would be overturned. But I like the direction which the defense is taking this. Perhaps it will spark a renewed effort to determine the real killer. Not much to add, I'm afraid, but wanted to let you know I am still here.

I am a bit troubled by the bondage and rough sex aspect. I fail to see that it adds much to the case either favoring Guandique or harming Condit. I think the details of his affairs were sufficient to ruin Condit even before the rough sex charges as indeed they did. So sufficient motive existed anyway. I abhor that type of activity as much as most people but I do recognize that there are people who willfully engage in it. From what I have read, and that's all I know, I don't have the impression that Chandra was afraid of Condit and have no doubt she would have willingly met with him on the day she went missing if he requested it. That her death was a result of bondage or rough sex seems ludicrous to me.

I'll be following with interest. Very much enjoy your comments so maybe you can tell me what I am missing.
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 May 23, 2016 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hi sigsky, good to see you. The point you raise is very important and needs to be understood by everyone.

I'll take the points carefully for any reader who might be asking the same question.

Guandique is in a retrial for Chandra's murder. The circumstances of charging him are that he assaulted two other women two weeks and two months after Chandra disappeared. They were joggers on jogging trails along Beach Drive.

He knocked both of them down and choked them but fortunately they both fought him off. He was convicted and sentenced to ten years Federal prison which he served. He was charged with Chandra's murder and remains in prison.

He was convicted in the first trial and sentenced to 60 years. The conviction was overturned due to the only evidence was a cellmate who lied on the stand about other things, therefore his claims about Guandique are also suspect.

In this retrial the second set of Public Defenders led by Jonathan Anderson could do what the first set did. They could sit there, watch the prosecution present the two women who were assaulted, hear their terrible stories, and convict Guandique again fior the assaults in the guise of a trial on Chandra's murder. He committed assaults, Chandra disappeared just before that, and her body was found in a deep forest on the other side the tallest hill in DC from Beach Drive.

The defense could again say but there's no evidence. You haven't proven Guandique gulty, and sit down. And the jury will find him guilty again. Because this lawyer thing of you didn't prove it is just a lawyer thing.

Now let's look at a real defense, what I argued for all along. Chandra had never exercised outdoors, didn't jog, and her gym manager testified she didn't even run on a treadmill. She practiced and preached safety for women, minored in Criminal Justice, was a Modesto Police Explorer in school, and never went anywhere without her pepper spray and certainly her phone. And she never went anywhere where it wasn't safe.

Yet the prosecution contends that Chandra took up jogging on the day she disappeared and traversed a route through highway, byway, and trails into the deepest, darkest forest on top of the tallest hill in DC because "it was a nice day". She wearing a heavy sweatshirt and leggings and shoes "not made for running" according to the police.

This all because she was found there and the DC Prosecutors and DC Police don't want to investigate someone who could kill her and dump her body where it was found, carefully tucked away halfway down this huge hill towards Broad Branch Road. They prefer she got there herself to be assaulted by the person they want to convict.

Now what was found with Chandra's remains? Her tights were tied into knots indicating her limbs were tied together in sophisticated bondage. Due to weather and animals the clothes had separated from her bones but they retained their knots.

Was this something more indicative of Guandique or Condit?

Assuming Chandra was tied up in the park the day she disappeared, and that is a big assumption that defies everything known about detection of rotting corpses by nearby dogs, a week later Guandique was chased out of a woman's apartment when she returned after he had broken in to steal jewelry.

Bondage? Murder? Brutal? No, he ran from the apartment. Seven days after Chandra was tied up and died. Maybe he was a kinder, gentler Guandique now?

She called the police, the police found him, arrested him, booked him, took a mugshot. That mugshot would show any facial injuries he would have had from a week before, facial injuries so memorable that his landlady placed those injuries a year later to this very time. That mugshot would confirm the landlady's testimony. That mugshot has never been produced.

What was Chandra doing before she disappeared? Waiting for a message. And searching on Condit and his family. When Condit walked out of a meeting with VP Cheney that Condit requested, Chandra logged off the internet.

Condit wasn't seen for another five and half hours. Chandra was never seen again, alive.

When she was seen again, it was in the remnants of bondage. Who was Chandra waiting on a message from, what did it say, and why did Chandra look up Rock Creek Park after searching on Condit for hours?

And did Chandra's bondage have anything to do with Condit's bondage sex, or Guandique's running away?

What Condit's bondage sex, you say.

Let's call a witness to the stand.

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: Mon May 23, 2016 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rainbow, now it's clear how potential witnesses statements were treated.

They loved that statement from someone who said she clearly recalled seeing Guandique in Rock Creek Park on May 1, 2001, recalling it vividly for the police several years later.

That's the kind of statements they find credible.

The rest, not so much.

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: Mon May 23, 2016 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

from Washington Post comments:
I'm sure Condit knows more than he is saying, but trying to link him to the slaying with that flimsy "evidence" is a joke. Maybe he was involved in her murder, but there is no evidence to support this accusation.

There's no doubt, same as there is literally no evidence to support the accusation against Guandique. So the defense, rightfully, is presenting Condit as more circumstantial to her death than Guandique. That she was found in remnants of bondage points to a lover who practiced bondage sex more than a an assaulter of joggers when she didn't even exercise outdoors.

There's more, such as the behavior of Chandra before she disappeared and Guandique after she disappeared. But that addresses the linkage you question.
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 May 26, 2016 2:17 pm    Post subject: Potential Witnesses Reply with quote

Hi rd and friends!
Thank you for taking the time to outline the case strategy choices that were available for prosecutors and defense attorneys to follow in charging and defending someone for Chandra's murder. It is surprising, indeed, that they were deceived into pursuing a red-herring, instead!
The DC police, Levy investigators, and FBI gathered and were provided with quite a lot of "real-time" statements and evidence in conjunction with the disappearance and murder of Chandra Levy from additional potential witnesses, which complimented the women's "rough sex". It is mandatory that the defense team gets access to ALL of this evidence.
One example is a sighting in Adams Morgan by a potential witness, who was in regular contact with Larry Kennedy (one of the DC homicide detectives originally involved in solving the mystery of Chandra's disappearance) and the Levy investigators, of someone who strongly resembled Chandra, with her rose tattoo, in the company of someone who looked like another well-known figure in this case, after the presumed time of her "disappearance" (or kidnapping). A second example is the testimony from the person who heard the "scream" from Chandra's apartment building and made a 9-11 call around the time of her disappearance. A third example is a photo that was sent to the DC police and the FBI lab, which captured the license plate of a red car in Adams Morgan that was used to pick up the woman with the rose tattoo and two other people.
Since potential witnesses remained in contact with police and investigators for many years after the case went "cold", these potential witnesses were also privy to some comments on the case, which were made by the detectives and investigators, themselves. For example, Larry Kennedy stated to a potential witness in a phone conversation that Guandique had been eliminated as a suspect, because police knew where he was at the time of the true disappearance/murder and that was some place that he would not have been able to leave.


Last edited by Rainbow on Thu May 26, 2016 9:31 pm; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rd



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

PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2016 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hi rainbow, I believe this Public Defender has shown he's aggressive enough to do that, deal with all the information that was given helpful to show the truth about what happened to Chandra, deal with police guided testimony such as the "I saw Guandique in Rock Creek Park on May 1 several years ago" and Gaundique's landlady who swore a year later that Guandique got his face scratched at that time.

Very memorable, she says, but nothing about it in the police arrest report of Guandiuque a week after Chandra disappeared, and a description of no tattoos.. They won't produce the mug shot that would confirm this landlady's claim, made to indict Guandique. No, all you got is a lady that harbored illegal aliens saying whatever the police told her to say, because, did I mention she harbored illegal aliens.

Or a Washington Post reporter helping the government railroad this case by quoting an anonymous employer that Guandique didn't show up that day. Very memorable years later. Never heard anything more about that employer again once DC Prosecutors got their indictment from charges that were full of lies and stuff like "Guandique became heavily tattooed in prison, so he must have murdered Chandra."

wow, you have to be pretty low to look bad in comparison to Guandique, but these jokers manage to pull it off.

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: Fri May 27, 2016 6:10 pm    Post subject: Legal Issues Invoved in Guandique Receiving a Retr Reply with quote

Huffington Post
What the Chandra Levy Retrial Teaches Us About Defendants' Rights
May 26, 2016
by David Benowitz

Hi, again, everybody!

This article contains a summary of the legal issues involved in Guandique being granted a retrial:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-benowitz/what-the-chandra-levy-ret_b_10146094.html

[/b]The facts behind Ingmar Guandique's retrial provide us a disturbing look at just how ugly things can get when prosecutors who are under pressure to produce a conviction in a high profile case trample a defendant's rights in order to get it.[b]
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
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
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