I began my day researching the Chandra Levy trial in prep for the trial review.
A brief summary of the case-
Chandra Levy disappeared in 2001. Initially, attention was drawn toward a man in congress who was having an affair with her- Gary Condit. The media essentially ruined his life with the accusations. However, he had a very solid alibi on the day of her disappearance. It wasn’t until a year later her body was discovered in a park. A man named Ingar Guandique was the latest suspect after this. He had attacked two women in the park previously. All evidence was circumstantial and not concrete enough for a conviction. At the time of the trial, he was already serving time in prison for previous robberies. A man in prison claimed that Guandique had admitted to the killing of Chandra Levy. This witness was later ruled as inadmissible evidence due to bias: him wanting to join the witness protection program.
Now, due to the timing of this trial (2001), the world was amidst chaos from the tragic 9/11 attacks the case ended up being lost news.
Cassidy law is tasked with the review of the ethics behind the case.
I delved into what truly went wrong with the Chandra Levy case
Here are my takeaways,
- All the evidence is circumstantial for both suspects.
- DNA was not recoverable at the crime scene because the body had been left for over a year.
- The media destroyed this case- putting the attention on the blame of the crime on Gary Condit was not the correct approach. This essentially botched the case from the beginning putting immediate prejudice on potential Jurors.
- 9/11 and other factors delayed this case
- Without delay, it is very possible the DNA swipes would have worked and the killer would be behind bars today
Conclusions,
This gave me great insight into the parameters behind a proper conviction. Circumstantial evidence leads nowhere in murder cases. All fingers can point at one person; however, if there is no physical evidence they can not and will not be convicted.
Interesting stuff! Please always include one or more images with each blog post. For this one, a photo of the suspect would have been good.