Table of Contents
In early May 2001, Chandra Ann Levy, an American intern at the Federal Bureau of Prisons in Washington D.C., went missing. She was presumed dead, following the findings of her remains in Rock Creek Park the next year. What appeared an ordinary homicide turned out to be the most sought after case in the US news media for years. The deceased was last seen in the beginning of May. A report was filed five days later at the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia regarding the disappearance of the intern. What followed was a frantic search in hospitals and Chandra's apartment where there was no evidence of foul play. However, after a revelation by the father of the deceased that she had an affair with a United States congressional representative, the turn of events and investigations changed completely. What had seemed an ordinary disappearance became a major case that was to dominate the nation and even change people’s careers. The following paper digs into the mystery surrounding the presumed murder of the intern, the suspects involved, and the case files related to the same. In addition, the paper looks into the current standing of the justice system regarding the murder of Chandra Ann Levy.
Disappearance
Chandra Ann Levy went missing on May 1, 2001, and the search that ensued after her disappearance did not yield any results. Neither an extensive search conducted in her apartment nor her laptop, which was inadvertently corrupted, produced any leads. After the remains had been discovered and an autopsy conducted, the police were assured of opening a murder inquiry. The disappearance led to the media publicizing the story and much was said about the suspects that created a big scandal. Academics characteristically take scandals as ensuing from the revelation of official misconduct (Nyhan, 2015, p. 435). The disappearance led to one of the biggest scandals in the United States.
Suspects in the Homicide Investigation
Among the primary suspects involved in the murder of the intern was one Congressman Gary Condit and Ingmar Guandique, a twenty-year-old illegal immigrant from El Salvador. The two suspects had a direct impact on the deceased and therefore, they were likely to be the prime suspects in this case. Earlier on, reports had it that Condit had an affair with the deceased, which in some way could have contributed to the plot to eliminate her, as seen in the ensuing analysis. The relationship between Guandique and Levy was that of a hired hitman and an unhappy man where the latter was alleged to have paid the suspect the right amount of cash to implement the plot. However, Condit was exonerated after Guandique had admitted to having attacked two women at the same venue where the deceased had been discovered.
Possible Motives for the Murder
Evidence that was used to try Guandique was obtained from witnesses and informants. Initially, an informer told his lawyer that the accused had confided in him of being hired by the congressional representative to kill the intern. Another evidence that linked the suspect to the homicide investigation was that at the time of the intern’s murder, he was missing at his workstation. According to the defendant's landlady, he appeared disheveled with a bruised and scratched face. However, the defendant denied any murder claims, although he failed a polygraph test (Smoot & Courson, 2010). Nonetheless, the polygraph test raised questions, considering it was conducted in English, and neither the informant nor the suspect was fluent in English.
The Case
The homicide linking Guandique was regarded a cold case until 2006, when the case took another turn after the investigators had been replaced with more experienced and apt ones. Therefore, the case was re-examined, with Guandique at the heart of everything. Among the evidence gathered was a portrait of the deceased from a magazine's edition that was found in the cell of the accused. The case of the accused started in March 2009, when the suspect was apprehended and charged with killing Levy. The accused pleaded not guilty, and the defense contested the legality of conducting a search of the defendant federal penitentiary cell. Nevertheless, the case trial was set for the following year in October.
The trial commenced as scheduled, with the witnesses being the women earlier assaulted by the accused. During the trial, Condit was exonerated, where more initial claims were refuted. However, a genetic test conducted on the fluids found in the deceased innerwear matched that of the congressman. The informant claimed that the accused admitted to having killed Levy, although he had not had any sexual interactions with her (Alexander, 2010). Many charges were leveled against the accused, but he was exonerated on two charges of rape and murder related to the crime. The prosecution rested their case on November 10, while the defense followed suit 5 days later. The witnesses who refuted claims of the accused ever admitting killing anyone saw other charges of attempted burglary and abduction dropped regarding the statute of limitations. The defense insisted that the defendant was just a victim of circumstance and that the case filed by the prosecution was fictitious (Alexander, 2010). The accused was found guilty on the remaining first-degree murder counts, and the informer's testimony was accepted as real. However, numerous individuals were unsatisfied with the verdict and they attributed the outcome to the jury's empathy to Levy’s mother. What followed was sentencing and appeals.
Sentencing, Appeals, and Latest Developments
A fresh trial was requested in February 2011 under the claims that the sentencing had been unlawfully acquired. The factor was related to the emotional inclination of the prosecution to the jury where facts were not considered. There were also other claims of code contravention by some jurors and therefore, the need to have a fair trial for the accused had arisen. Guandique faced a minimum sentence of 30 years and worst still, life incarceration with no prospects of bail. The prosecutors were adamant on having the maximum possible sentence for the man. Therefore, they stated that the defendant lacked the self-restraint, which made him a danger to women. In strengthening their case, the prosecution provided the proof of the charged unruly conduct towards the female staff in the penitentiary. However, there lingered uncertainty concerning the defendant’s constant plea of innocence and his feeling sorry for Levy's parents. The factor was later proven when the judges lately decided to acquit Guandique. However, at that moment, Fisher, the president of the tribunal, handed the accused a sentence of 60 years behind bars.
Summer of 2015
After countless unsuccessful appeals, the public defender finally succeeded in convincing the judge to convene another trial in 2015. By May 2015, the prosecutors had lessened their opposition to a new trial. The new trial was partly facilitated by the fact that the prosecution had failed to reveal that the star witness in the sentencing of the accused was known for being unreliable and his claims of being a mole were refuted. Considering a new evidence from a new witness, the judge had no option but open a new trial in June 2015. On the case files, the defense argued that the information was distorted by the informer to gain indulgence with the police. The proceeding extended to November and it was characterized by prosecution errors.
Spring of 2016
July 2016 marked another turn of events, where the prosecution decided not to continue with the case and instead, it sought to have the accused deported. The case took the turn after the trial had uncovered the fact that the informer influential in the sentencing of the accused was covertly recorded confessing deceit on the witness position during the sentencing of Guandique in 2010.
Summer of 2016
After the newfound evidence, the necessity of another pretrial was eliminated due to lack of enough proof (Bui, Alexander, & Higham, 2016). The case was lengthy, and it gave rise to new theories as to why the homicide had taken place.
Possible Reasons for the Homicide
Various theories have been put forward as to what might have instigated the murder of Levy. Despite the variance, the theories might have an ounce of truth, considering the suspects in the case had a rather strange and unusual behavior. In trying to establish what might have happened to the intern, one can carefully analyze the suspects and theorize possible motives for homicide. The theories may allude to the possible reasons for the killing.
Gary Condit
Regarding Gary Condit, many ideas have surfaced that put the former congressional representative in a likely position to have instigated, caused, or facilitated the murder of the intern. Care should also be taken that the paper merely looks at the theories from a research perspective and not from a judicial or legal standing. Condit was a member of Congress who had serious influence on the United States House Intelligence Committee. Considering his position, marriage, and the fact that he was much older than Levy, the impact the scandal would have to him and his marriage would be immense. Nevertheless, he has failed to secure his seat as most politicians who do not survive a disgrace never make it to another term (Basinger, 2013, p. 385). Therefore, to salvage his marriage and career, Condit might have had no option other than to eliminate the obstacle standing in his way.
According to several purported ex-lovers of Condit, he had a penchant for bondage during intercourse, and one of the females had claimed that he was extremely aggressive with her during a sexual escapade referring to a recent court filing (Alexander, 2016). The same statements were made to investigators in 2001 and they were consequently cited by the defense counsel on behalf of the individual facing a retrial in the case. According to the claims made by the women, there is a high probability of making Gary Condit a suspect because when the Levy’s remains were discovered, a pair of jogging costume was seen adjacent (Alexander, 2016). Every leg of the pants had been bound in a knot, which gave the prosecutors the inkling that Guandique had used them to detain Chandra Levy in the park.
Normally, aggressive intercourse entailing bondage might not be a safe act, and the Condit may have had the urge to dispose of the intern's remains and her clothing in knots, should she have passed away during the activity. According to Alexander (2016), one of the women, who had confessed to having aggressive intercourse with Condit, claimed that the man had shown a liking to bond her with pieces of clothing. The woman further argued that Condit's then counsel had tried to make her attest a false affidavit, excluding her from having ever had a sexual encounter with his boss, which she vehemently declined. It is worth noting that Condit's relationship with the woman occurred simultaneously with that of Levy and further still, it transpired while the man was married. The second woman also attested to Condit's uncanny sexual conduct. He dated her for several years before dating Levy. The woman claimed that Condit had used to tie her up during intercourse to an iron bed with posts to enhance bondage objectives (Alexander, 2016). One should also mention that the statements made by the women were recorded in court files. Further, according to the second woman, she feared Condit and agreed to his demands to avoid consequences.
The presence of knotted jogging pants at the site where the body had been found also gave a clear indication for bondage before the woman’s demise. Further, conferring to defense claims, Condit could have employed the clothes to restrain the intern during an aggressive sexual act gone wrong (Alexander, 2016). The claim can be substantiated by the fact that the man’s DNA had been discovered in the deceased woman’s underwear, an indication that there had been a sexual encounter between the two. Denying integrity desecrations for leaders is actual when the subject cannot be proved since one can claim guiltlessness of crime, which will have a positive effect until one's culpability can be determined (Hasel & Grover, 2015, p. 177). Evidence from a biography of Levy in The Washington Times depicted the deceased as a woman who had a liking for the aged men who possessed power like Gary Condit, and she was reluctant to quit when some of them had decided to call off the sexual relationships (McBride, 2016).
Guandique
As for Ingmar Guandique, much have been theorized and claimed, although no one seemed to put the immigrant’s tangibly at the scene of the crime. Therefore, he was set free. However, despite being set free due to the lack of evidence after the court had found out that the key witness crucial to his sentencing in 2010 had lied, various theories might link Guandique to the disappearance. Guandique was an undocumented immigrant who had earlier pleaded guilty to attacking two other women at knifepoint in the same park where the intern had disappeared and he served a ten-year sentence to that effect. Much of the evidence employed to convict Ingmar Guandique was mostly centered on the informant's evidence, which was later proved false. Prosecutors assumed Guandique had tied up Levy like his former victims and then left her to perish of thirst or exposure. Guandique had a tendency of assaulting women joggers at the park; hence, the possibility of him attacking Levy was also high, considering that the intern went jogging in the park on the fateful day she had gone missing.
Conclusion
Conclusively, the Chandra Levy case has proved to be the lengthiest one that has dragged on for years with no actual killer being brought to book. However, the case has uncovered the mysteries associated with cases involving powerful individuals and the justice system. From the analysis, there lacked conclusive evidence to convict the suspected killer, Guandique, and hence his subsequent acquittal from the trial in the ensuing years. Regarding Gary Condit, the truth will be heard to unearth though there exists a proof of sexual affair linking the former congressman to the deceased woman. In addition, there has emerged evidence that Gary Condit had a penchant for aggressive sexual intercourse and the indications at the site, where Levy’s remains had been found, had proved a possible sexual encounter gone awry. The case and proceedings have further exposed the flaws in the criminal justice system where several problems have been identified. Among the issues, one could name substandard investigative measures by the law enforcement and a biased legal order that could sometimes rely on false statements to sentence people.