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 

Public defenders request evidence on Gary Condit
Goto page 1, 2  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: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:53 pm    Post subject: Public defenders request evidence on Gary Condit Reply with quote

Gaundique's lawyers requested evidence on Gary Condit.

Now that was a long time coming.

Keith Alexander reports in Washington Post, link below, and I commented:

This is an outstanding article and good news. Thanks.
On the former lawyer's comment and the oft-mentioned DC Police cleared Condit, in reality there are many questions, including his whereabouts at the time, and Condit provided no information that cleared him.

That doesn't mean he's guilty, but it means all questions remain unanswered, no alibi provided, and when a woman disappears, an ex or soon to be ex is usually behind it. That doesn't mean always, but that and no alibi is reasonable doubt without a doubt.

rd


Attorneys for man accused of killing Levy request evidence on Gary Condit
Washington Post
November 19, 2015
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/attorneys-for-man-accused-of-killing-levy-request-evidence-on-gary-condit/2015/11/19/71a28906-8e28-11e5-acff-673ae92ddd2b_story.html


Background and analysis:

Guandique new trial in March 2016

Guandique Murder Analysis

Washington Post investigation of Chandra Levy cold case

Murder on a Horse Trail Chapter 24. Guandique

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

Track offenders with GPS recorders!

www.justiceforchandra.com home page
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are a lot of details in the Public Defenders request I want to comment on.

from Washington Post:
For the second trial, Guandique has a new team of attorneys from the Public Defender’s Service. In its Nov. 9 letter to prosecutors, the team requested about 47 various items including phone records for Condit and his wife, Carolyn, around the time Levy disappeared; notes from police, FBI and assistant U.S. attorney interviews with Condit; receipts, calendar entries and video surveillance footage involving Condit;

and information regarding a two-page confidential document detailing Condit’s whereabouts around the time of Levy’s disappearance.


A two page confidential document detailing Condit's whereabouts at the time.

That's interesting. There was a document that Condit gave the DC Police and his aide helpfully released it, and when all hell broke loose his aide said that it "wasn't ready" and shouldn't have been released.

I analyze that document in Murder on a Horse Trail Chapter 17. Alibi. It had to be carefully parsed.

To an undiscerning reader given to trust the source until given reason to look closer, it seemed like a pretty good alibi.

Until you looked closer.

I suspect the two page confidential document is this document that was made "ready to go" and given to the DC Police. We will have to wait till trial to see how close it is to the absolute nonsense Condit had in the first one.

The chapter is quite enlightening. I'll go through it and comment over the next few days. But take a read for yourself.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

responding on Washington Post to a comment that Condit was last person to see her alive:

Just to keep facts clear, there's no evidence that Condit was last person to see her alive. That person was a gym manager who she talked to previous evening about canceling her gym contract.

@jubei, I agree with most everything you said, but they (different Public Defender lawyers) did that last time to no effect. Reasonable doubt is what is required and this should have been done last time, but they had the conventional thoughts you have apparently.

This is the correct approach. There is plenty of reasonable doubt, including that Chandra didn't jog in the first place and cannot reasonably be placed in the park on her own as prosecutors alleged. Really wasn't even challenged that hard although parents didn't help by saying she could have gone there if police say she did. Sort of what are you going to do with a question like that trying an accused murderer of your child. Still no one has ever documented that trek that Chandra allegedly took in the clothes she was wearing and carrying what little she had. For example heavy sweatshirt and sports bra. I'm sure women will be first to tell you Chandra wasn't jogging in a heavy sweatshirt, and wasn't out in heavy traffic and remote roads in a sports bra.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

responding to Washington Post comment that Chandra was a former intern:

former by a week, which is also an interesting question as to how she became a former intern just before she disappeared. The details she wrote about that indicate someone was trying to get rid of her.

She had been scheduled to go back for graduation, It was the return trip that was possibly not going to take place now, although she had placed her application with the FBI and talked to Condit about helping her find a job. She had big news for her aunt which I believe was job related, but no one knows.

However there are indications from Condit in interviews that he talked to her around this time, and I believe the big news was job related. Big news as pregnancy has been widely discussed and doesn't make much sense.

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: Fri Nov 20, 2015 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As always, thanks for your analysis. I just saw this and will read carefully tomorrow. I recently had a chance to visit Luray, VA but it didn't work out. Would love to know more about what happened there. Anyway, I'm still here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nice to see you, sigsky, We could use an updated road trip to Luray piece. :)

Look forward to your comments on this new development.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

responding to Washinton Post comment "Even more disgusting were the trashy things she did":

She had an affair with an older man who told her his wife was an invalid and the marriage no longer viable. She didn't see his wife and had no reason to doubt him.

You'll probably not have too much trouble finding other women who have encountered that. Nothing trashy about it. She wanted to get married as he had promised. And she disappeared.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Washinghton Post comment: "Nothing I remember about Condit, particularly the dopey tv interview, would lead me to believe he was bright enough and thorough enough to literally get away with murder."


Whoever did this I doubt it was a planned murder. There is nothing particularly difficult about hiding a body in a remote location. There are still many missing women who had problems with their ex's when they disappeared.

On Condit's intelligence, he was able to manage multiple mistresses and a wife at the same time so he was a very careful manager of relationships. There was nothing dopey about him.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Washington Post comment: "The judge should not permit this defense. Gary Condit didn't do it. Given the publicity that the allegations against him received -- dominating every newscast 24/7 for months on end in one of the weirdest and most pointless press herd episodes I have ever experienced -- this is an effort by the defense to improperly prejudice the jury."


Making a request to the trial judge for evidence in the hands of the government, before a jury is seated and out of earshot of a jury, is not "improperly predjudicing the jury".

But in the prior pre-trial publicity of Guandique's first trial, I can name you several cases where the government did improperly predjudice the public against Guandique, many and several outrageous public claims.

So you have the two contrasts there, and you're complaining about the wrong one.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Washington Post comment: "Right, there is no evidence tying Condit to the site. Managing multiple mistresses when your spouse is on the west coast does not rise to the level of smarts to get away with murder. And, if you look again you will see I said the interview was dopey not condit.

I consider myself smarter than the average bear and i don't think I could pull something like that off."



ok, fair enough. The reason the interviews were so dopey was because he had to constrain himself to a few talking points whatever the question and was very strained and frozen doing it. That isn't how he normally was.

As far as being smart in getting away with murder, related to that was getting away with a secret affair. Chandra was swore to secrecy and basically acted in a type of government secret spy type thing Condit had going with some allusion to his role on Intelligence Committee, so no one knew what was going on with her which helps cover up disappearances. It was several days before anyone could be convinced she was even missing.

As we've seen with many missing women cases, when the body disappears it's difficult to find out what happened and determine who was behind it. Lots of men did it, and didn't particulary take any smarts unfortunately.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Washington Post comment: "Was there ever any physical evidence tying him to Levy? seems a pretty thin reed to hang a murder charge on."


No. In fact the only physical evidence was DNA found on Chandra's clothing that was not Guandique's but FBI said could not be identified as to who else it could have been.

This normally in any other case in the country is enough to determine the accused is not the guilty party. If convicted and jailed the conviction is overturned and they are released.

In this case, the government (US Attorneys, DC Police, and FBI) insisted it must be contaminated evidence, DC Police didn't have to try too hard to convince people of their incompetence, and it was never mind. Proceed with the railroading.

I don't care about Guandique, but I care that the US Justice Department that Chandra applied to work for will do whatever it takes to make her a crazy person out running around in a dense forest with nothing when she didn't even jog outdoors. But she took up jogging because "it was a nice day" according to people who have never attempted this trek themselves.

They aren't crazy enough to. But apparently they want people to believe Chandra was.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had an unexpected and nice surprise in finding this source of news:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/11/20/chandra-levy-murder-retrial-hits-a-snag.htm

This is some excellent reporting by Tim Ryan of Courthouse News.

I found out the Public Defenders are still fighting the DC Prosecutors trying to get them to turn over what they're supposed to turn over. In fact, if the government doesn't turn over the information soon, the trial will be requested to be postponed.

Well that's exactly what the Justice Department wants. This just goes on forever. And why? Why should the government turn over information helpful to someone that they've been trying to railroad all these years?

No reason to. Trial will be delayed. Whoop de do. Like they care if the trial ever gets held. And when it does, it will be without all the information they can get away with withholding.

New information to me: ...government has yet to turn over information on a number email accounts linked to Levy that were deleted three days before Levy's May 2001 disappearence.

Number of email accounts deleted? We know she had the one account still active that morning when the air fares email was forwarded to her parents. I'll follow up with an interesting post on this from pre-first trial.

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



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:59 pm

That whole email thing is really interesting. I'll be honest I didn't understand at first until one of our veteran posters pieced it together for us.

These were flight fare notifications from an airline for flights between Sacramento and Los Angeles. It had to do with the family going to her USC graduation on May 11.

Chandra had five months earlier gotten flight tickets to California and back from Condit. Up until two weeks before she disappeared, she would have expected to do the same, with the flights being to and from San Francisco where Condit flew because of the leeway it gave him for affairs (Anne Marie Smith, Joleen Argentini McKay for starters).

But when her parents came to DC, and Chandra pressed Condit for an explanation to her mother about Jennifer Thomas, all of a sudden Chandra wasn't needing a round trip ticket. The BOP told her her internship was over.

Certainly she expected the tickets from Condit as before. She planned on marrying him. But when her internship ended to her disbelief, she only needed a one way ticket. And she wasn't making any reservations or even telling her parents when and how she would be getting home, even when they asked somewhat urgently in her last phone call with them on Friday evening.

She didn't know, and there's a reason she didn't know. And that reason is Condit.

But she was either thinking of her parents and their family's flight to Los Angeles for her graduation or they asked her to keep an eye out for a good fare, because she had a search notification for supersaver fares with Southwest. And she got one sometime before Tuesday morning at 10:45 am Washington DC time.

It was forwarded from her email account at 10:45 am, arriving in Modesto at 7:45 am their time. Depending upon whether the email account was web based or email client based (Outlook and such) determines whether it came from her PC or not, or an entry in her browser history that indicates she went to her web email site.

I haven't seen details of her email account. Los Angeles Times reports that the email was forwarded from her computer without providing details how they know that. Police say the subpoenaed her ISP to get the emails. They would be there whether web or client based but not on her PC if she used web based email interface.

So technically enough information hasn't been provided to determine that Chandra didn't use an email client and instead used a web email interface, and that technically anyone knowing her password could log in to her web email account and do something like forward an email to her parents, without being on her computer, and no one would know unless the ISP retained log in IP addresses long enough to know the IP address accessing the web email account.

They did know the time of log in and log out that day, they did provide her emails to the police, so it's a real stretch for someone to be on her computer and someone else access her email account, but just need to clarify what is technically known from reported information.

Of course with more information the police haven't released, there would be less ambiguity.

The concept of forwarding an email without comment to her parents, after four days since talking to them and having big news for her aunt Linda, was something that just didn't make sense to me, so I thought I misunderstood.

Is it an indication it wasn't Chandra? That can be argued.

Is it that Chandra didn't know what to tell her parents yet, so didn't say anything?

Or that Chandra was planning on picking up a flight ticket to San Francisco from Condit later that day and didn't want to alarm her parents about it?

I think there's a strong argument for that.

But there was no comment, no emails from her to anyone, no phone calls to anyone, no contact with anyone, no one ever saw her.

In my opinion, the forwarded email without comment wouldn't be enough to establish that it was Chandra on her computer that morning, and that she wasn't kidnapped at 4:30 am outside the Newport, at least as far as establishing reasonable doubt that Chandra was already assaulted before anyone ever allegedly saw Guandique on Beach Road.

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: Sat Nov 21, 2015 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael Doyle weighs in:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/crime/article45653583.html

"But as the attorneys for Salvadoran immigrant Ingmar Guandique, who was convicted in November 2010, lay the groundwork for what’s called a “third party perpetrator” defense during Guandique’s retrial, they are seeking potential evidence involving Condit as well as four other men."

Wow, lots of stuff in this article. It's been a while but I'm dying to know who these other 4 might be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9234
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of the insights from the Courthouse News article was an exchange between Public Defender attorney Eugene Ohm and US Attorney Deborah Sines concerning that.

The four along with Condit were referred to as "potential perpetrators" and Sines was said to bristle at the label, including Sven Jones. She said Jones was in Canada at the time.

I have a long record of defending Sven Jones role in all this. It just really irritates me that everyone that steps forward and provides information about a missing person is accused of murder on the internet.

But reasonable doubt isn't about proving one other specific person committed the murder, but that there were ohers with opportunity and motive, sometimes strong motive.

So one must be careful, but one can't rule out where opportunity and motive exist. As to opportunity, Sven was in Canada at the time?

I start out Chapter Frantic with:
The phone calls started. Sven Jones returned from a long weekend out of town trip late Tuesday and got Chandra's message inviting him for lunch in Georgetown. He called back but never heard from her. He told the Washington Times: "I just thought that was odd because she was the type of person who would always call back".

This is typical of the DC Prosecutors. They have twisted and omitted truth all along. They wouldnt know truth if it smacked them upside the head. No one knows where Chandra was, and Sven arrived back home later that day. He was not "in Canada at the time".

Of course we spent the entire first trial pointing out similar ommissions of fact and commissions of untruths by DC Prosecutors. This is par for the course for them. They probably consider it an art form.

Having said that, tossing out potential jealousy of a male friend is really weak as a motive, and I can't think of any other possible motive. Nevertheless, I quote this from Chapter Grand Jury:

Sven Jones was asked to take a lie detector test, and after first agreeing refused to take it, a tell tale sign of talking to a lawyer. It's a travesty that lawyers as an industry advise everyone not to take lie detector tests so that the first thing you have to do to do the right thing is have the courage to ignore their industry pap advice.

Sure you could fail the test and raise suspicion, or you could refuse to take it and raise suspicion. Nice choice, with the lawyers no help to the victim in their blinders view of looking out for your interest. You have to care more about the victim than yourself to ignore them. Those who do do exactly that.

Not only does a person suffer the loss of a friend or loved one when someone they know disappears and is found murdered, but they must also suffer the scrutiny of police and public. Their offer to add insight into the tragedy by agreeing to fully answer questions and taking lie detector tests from the police to help solve the case should be recognized by all as admirable.

The logistics of Sven's situation was that he arrived back in D.C. the same day Chandra disappeared, and one of the last messages she left was asking to meet him in Georgetown for lunch. Certainly it is unfortunate but appropriate that the police looked at his whereabouts hard and asked him to take a lie detector test. Sven did the right thing. He took the test and passed it.


So naming a person the police requested a polygraph from is due diligence. Can't dispute that. They were right and DC prosecutor wrong, as usual.

Of the other three, I don't know, but I would say it's based on this:

Screams heard before Chandra disappeared
UPI
July 15, 2001

Police sources have said they also have asked three other men [than Condit] to take lie detector tests but did not disclose who they were and how were the connected to Levy's disappearance.


I'm pretty the two who stepped forward and provided valuable information about Chandra, Sven and the gym manager, are two of them. I don't know who the third would be off the top of my head.

The fourth might be an associate of Condit, but just a guess.

But it might be a moot point. Washington Post reported this:

In an earlier letter, Guandique’s attorneys asked prosecutors for information on five people, including Condit, who they termed “potential perpetrators.” They include a colleague of Levy’s at the Bureau of Prisons. The later request by the defense deals only with Condit.

In the end, although reasonable doubt should be all reasonable doubt, I don't think there's reasonable doubt with the others.

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 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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