www.justiceforchandra.com

[Rainbow]

Okay. . . so let's brainstorm. . . hmmm. . . WAS or WAS NOT Chandra's bracelet originally with her things? If it was missing at first, where was it? And, how was it returned? Also, why was the public made to believe it was missing? Why are we now made to believe it was in custody all of the time? As you stated RD, I thought her parents, investigators and police had sorted through her belongings. Now, what happened to her pinkie ring?

[rd]

No, they keep trying to imply Guandique had Chandra's ring. Nothing straightforward, just lots of innuendo like everything else they're saying.

Someone wants us to think no one looked through Chandra's belongings looking for a clue to her disappearance? That her parents never were given an opportunity to carefully examine her belongings? We know they're incompetent, but we're not going to let them use it as an excuse for anything they want to make up.

The Levys were quoted by the Washington Post as thinking that the bracelet looked like Chandra's. They were being asked to compare it to a memory from eight years ago where they saw Chandra for one week. And they were told it was found in her belongings, lo and behold, down at the bottom of something allegedly by one of these Washington Post reporters.

Just like when finding Chandra's remains, are we supposed to believe that was the first time someone looked?

rd

[Rainbow]

RD,
What do you think is most likely to show up next. . . keys, pepper spray, cell phone, missing check, FBI application, Bureau of Prisons application?

[rd]

I think they're done manufacturing evidence, Rainbow. The gold bracelet was critical to their case that she was running miles away from home instead of being with the man who gave her the bracelet.

For that matter, the murderer had her bracelet hidden somewhere, and it may very well be the original bracelet given to Chandra. It's just a matter of how it later managed to find its way into Chandra's belongings, same as just a matter of how Chandra's remains managed to find their way to Rock Creek Park long after they were just bones.

Searchers were all around, even if they didn't go off the main roads other people did. Beer cans, condoms, lipstick, all kinds of objects laying all around, yet no one noticed a decomposing body and bones spread out all over a hillside until a year later.

And no DNA found from the decomposition.

In other words, no basis whatsoever to establish that Chandra decomposed where she was found.

That should be high on the list of Guandique's defense lawyers for the prosecution to establish that Chandra was even murdered in Rock Creek Park. They can't do it.

rd

[Rainbow]

Hi Everybody!
As it appears, various people who are involved in or who have involved themselves in this case have differing motives for leaving it "unsolved", finding a "fresh" solution, the "real" solution or just no "solution". As we are discussing all of these possibilities here in this forum, I thought you might enjoy looking at the case through the eyes of someone or group of someones, who would potentially have motive(s) to "cover-up" the truth, for whatever the reason may be. I'm sure that you all might find that the "who's" and "why's" for doing such a thing would be just as interesting as the "how's". Of course, the following excerpt is to be used just as a mental exercise and does not necessarily reflect my or anyone else on this forum's opinion of how this investigation has been handled.

http://www.caught.net/prose/truthno.htm#Disinformation

[caseinpt]

>And no DNA found from the decomposition.

Thats an interesting pt. Assuming rain and a year of decomposition, would not the soil directly underneath the remains have enough characteristics (if not actual DNA) that it belonged to a human and be able to confirm how the long the body was there? I mean her remains should be like fertilizer. And a soil analysis should be able to confirm that or not, right?

[Rainbow]

So, what were the findings of Mr. Ubelaker, the Smithsonian forensic anthopologist? All of the experts who worked closely on this case that I'm aware of believed that Chandra's remains had been brought to the park.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1002579,00.html

It looks like Doug Ubelaker does a lot of work for the FBI. . .

http://www.public-action.com/911/rescue/obq-wp-boneguys-05-31-2002/

Also, once again a quote by Billy Martin:

http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2002-05-29/article/12255

[rd]

Right, caseinpt. Here's some more iinfo on police not being able to establish that Chandra was murdered in Rock Creek Park, and in fact all indications are that Chandra was moved there later, therefore the case against Guandique has no basis to start with.

Police believe Levy's body was put at site
By Matthew Cella and Jim Keary
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 24, 2002

Because only skeletal remains were found, police will search for samples of Miss Levy's DNA among the brush to determine whether she died there or somewhere else, a police source said. If officers find large samples of her DNA in one location, it can be assumed her body decomposed there.


Ted Williams, Michael Baden
On the Record with Greta Van Susteren
June 4, 2002

MICHAEL BADEN, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: I think what happens to the decomposition fluids -- we can tell that the body's been in a place decomposing because the soil underneath the body will have a lot different chemicals in it than normal places in the park because the body as it decomposes changes the soil underneath it.

VAN SUSTEREN: And is that why they took soil samples from underneath, is to determine whether it decomposed there?

BADEN: Well, I think that would be a good reason to do that, in addition to which small bones, like the hyoid bone, like the little finger bone, might be a couple of inches underneath the soil by the time leaves and animal activity has ended. So it's good to take the soil underneath the body.


Medical examiner says Chandra Levy was murdered
By Mark Sherman / Associated Press
The Detroit News.
May 29, 2002

Arden said he could not determine whether the young woman died where her skeletonized remains were found, or if she had been brought there after her death.


No clue in FBI tests to Chandra's killer
By HELEN KENNEDY
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
August 15, 2002

The FBI has found no DNA or fiber evidence on the clothing discovered with Chandra Levy's skeleton - all but ensuring the high-profile murder case will go unsolved.

The slim hope that some scrap of evidence pointing to a killer was dashed after weeks of testing turned up nothing.


One reason there would be no DNA found on her clothing is if the murder scene was staged, that she was not manhandled, sexually assaulted, and had violent interaction with her attacker, all of which would leave elements of the attacker in her clothing.

and just for good measure about the alleged jogging:

Was Chandra Levy Sexually Assaulted Before She Died?
On the Record with Greta Van Susteren
May 31, 2002.

TED WILLIAMS, FORMER D.C. HOMICIDE DETECTIVE: Listen, Greta, let's be very realistic. When you're talking about rapists who murder, people who rob, who kill, those individuals will rob, kill, and get out of there. They will rape, kill, and move out in a hurry. They don't take time to try to get rid of a body. Somebody methodically attempted to get rid of the body of Chandra Levy, as far as I'm concerned.


Possibilty Levy's body dumped
Los Angeles Times
May 29, 2002

Police already have rummaged through a picnic area overlooking the site and reportedly are studying the possibility that Levy's body was dumped from above.

Another friend, Mike Vanden Bosch, who met Levy when they were both newsroom assistants at the Modesto Bee newspaper, recalled her smoky voice, her loud laugh, and her ever-present sweat shirt from the University of Southern California, where she attended graduate school.


Modesto mourns Levy as homocide is confirmed
San Jose Mercury News
May 29, 2002

Of all the things Mike Vanden Bosch remembers about his friend Chandra Levy, the one that made him laugh Tuesday was that USC sweatshirt.

She wore it everywhere, he told more than 1,000 people at her public memorial. Even in the oppressive heat of Central Valley summers, Levy insisted on wearing that sweatshirt, he said, laughing.

She was wearing it last spring when she went to Rock Creek Park in Washington, D.C., where, the police chief announced Tuesday, she was the victim of homicide.


Condit Lawyer: Lie Test OK
By HELEN KENNEDY
Daily News Washington Bureau
May 30, 2002

And there are questions about whether Levy was out jogging at all. The site is 5 miles from her apartment; she usually avoided running in the park. And according to the Farmers' Almanac, it was 82 degrees on the afternoon of May 1, 2001 - hot for jogging.

Missing were Levy's size 4 gold signet ring, set with two diamond chips and her intertwined initials - a $416 custom-designed gift from her mother - her apartment key and a thin gold bracelet.

Levy's aunt Linda Zamsky said her niece proudly showed off the congressman's gift at Passover in April 2001.


Picture of Levy ring released
By Guy Taylor
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 30, 2002

"We did not find a bracelet that she may have worn or her keys, and we have not found the ring," police spokesman Sgt. Joe Gentile said.


and then there's this from poster JenX:

Well, two things--a cassette Walkman is generally a lot smaller than a CD Walkman (unless you are using a fancy MP3 player) and a lot of people still use them. She could have taped CD's onto a cassette and used that for walking--I do it all the time, and use a CD Walkman for running. So they aren't necessarily outdated for that purpose.

However, that doesn't really explain a missing cassette. That seems weird to me.

and to me too. Espcially when we consider that the tape she listened to when her parents were visiting two weeks earlier was of Frank Sinatra.

rd

[Rainbow]

Hi RD!
I thought that a Frank Sinatra cassette was found near the walkman.

[Rainbow]

May be the "lost and found" bracelet was kept in the watchbox.

[rd]

If a Frank Sinatra tape had been found in the Walkman with Chandra, all hell would have broken loose. Needless to say, there was no tape. Don't confuse National Enquirer fantasy stories with other reporting.

They do that to sell their tabloids, I understand, but they end up distorting the image of what actually happened in their playfullness. Must be nice to just make up anything you want. Sort of reminds me of the DC police and their "tips".

Condit definitely didn't have the TAG Hauer watch when he threw away the cardboard watchbox on his way to having his apartment searched.

But he also definitely didn't hang on to an empty box for a watch for five years after a previous mistress gave it to him until his apartment was searched for signs of a missing woman.

By the way, that previous mistress called the FBI immediately when Chandra's picture was shown on national news with Condit, and implored them to search Condit's apartment immediately. The politically appointed US Attorney stopped it just as immediately.

That's also the same day the police searched behind Condit's condo building in the dumpster, being denied access to his condo, and the day that Condit walked off the House floor and left a caller id from Luray, Virginia that night at midnight calling yet another mistress to try to keep her from going to the police as well.

Didn't work. She did, and told the police what the caller id number was, and that he had a car. And that he had signs of using bondage in his condo bedroom.

All suppressed by police and news media because he was a powerful Congressman, and a missing intern and mistresses were not.

The watch had to have been in tha box recently for him to still have the box. Where did the watch go, and does it have anything to do with being in Luray, Virginia at midnight two weeks after Chandra disappeared?

rd

[Rainbow]

Hi RD!
So, does Daniel Kevin Hand work for the National Enquirer?

from washingtonpost.com Chandra Levy Reporters Notebook blog:

Daniel Kevin Hand wrote:

Chandra Levy did not carry a Walkman; she carried an Aiwa cassette player. The cassette player was not taken; only her keys and pinkie ring were taken.

Do you really suppose that eagle-eyed Ingmar Guandique chose to mug Chandra Levy because he spotted her wearing a pinkie ring-- and then killed her for it? Why did he not kill the later two, one of whom was wearing a much more valuable diamond engagement ring, which was not taken? (He did not take their Walkman units, either; nor anything else.)

[rd]

No, you're right, he does not. He says the cassette player wasn't taken. He didn't say a cassette was in it. In fact:

Park Slope Went Unsearched
By Steve Twomey and Sari Horwitz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, May 24, 2002

Police were also examining personal items recovered at the site, they said, including a sweat shirt from the University of Southern California, where Levy, 24, was pursuing a master's degree; a portable radio, which did not include a cassette tape; leotards; and strands of dark hair.

rd

[Rainbow]

I think I read or heard somehere that the cassette was near the cassette recorder and that the tape was loose.

[rd]

yes, in the National Enquirer, and hence my warning about fantasy stories from the National Enquirer and DC police.

rd