I. Case Summary
On May 1, 2001, a 24-year-old intern named Chandra Levy vanished without a trace. Her case became a sensational one because her boyfriend, a promising and married US congressman was suspected initially to have something to do with her disappearance.
Fifty-two-year-old Rep. Gary Condit, who like Levy hailed from Modesto California, had become a subject of police investigation and their prime suspect when authorities learned of his affair with Chandra.
Despite Condit's denial of having to do with her disappearance and his cooperation with the investigation, police bore down on him and considered him its prime suspect – searching his apartment (where Chandra would spend the nights) and even getting a sample of his DNA. These moves by the police though did not help at all in locating her whereabouts.
Even Chandra's parents were convinced Condit had something to do with their daughter's disappearance (due largely to the testimony of Chandra's aunt that Chandra had confided her affair with Condit to her). The Levys turned to the media in order to keep the case alive and for the police to promptly find her.
But the investigation turned out to be sloppy, with the police missing out on certain leads that would have pointed to her whereabouts soon. The police had also failed to consider other suspects in her disappearance.
Sadly, Chandra's remains were eventually found but only a year after she went missing when a man hiking in Rock Creek Park chanced upon them. Still, the investigation on who might have killed Chandra dragged on for several years. It was only in 2008 when the police finally considered another suspect, turning their sights on Ingmar Adalid Guandique, a 19-year-old who hailed from El Salavador, and who was in jail since 2001 for attacking two women joggers in the same park where Chandra's remains were found.
As the police went on to focus its attention on Guandique, Washington Post run a series of reports on Chandra's case and raised the possibility that she was a victim of random attack in the park. It was also the same paper that raised the possibility that the El Salvadorian was a possible suspect in her murder.
In 2010, Guandique was finally charged of Chandra's murder and the trial is ongoing.
A. Victimology
Chandra was believed to have been a victim of random attack in the park, allegedly by Guandique. She was as a high risk victim because she had engaged in a ``solo activity'' when she walked all by herself in the park that day. She had also walked to an isolated path in the park, increasing her chances of being a victim of a crime because a criminal act after all happens when an offender finds an opportunity to do so.
Her get-up that day –sweatshirt and pants, probably also drew attention to her attacker who would conclude that she was alone walking in the park and could easily be prevailed upon.
Since she was found in the park and they found her clothes –sweatpants and jogging pants, authorities should have concluded immediately she was hiking in the park and thus, could have been attacked there.
The police should have then focused on looking for her attacker in the park.
B. Crime Scene Assessment
The initial crime scene here was the site where Chandra's remains were found by a hiker, in this case an isolated ravine where her skull was discovered. Authorities also found bones in the ravine. Ditto, her articles of clothing – bra, pants and sweatshirt –and the Walkman she owned.
The other potential crime scene is the other places in the park where her other remains were found. These other remains were missed out by the police and found instead by private investigators that Chandra's parents hired. Found were more pieces of bones of Chandra. The police though had an explanation that they missed out on the other bones of Chandra because it appeared animals had scattered them through the years.
Looking at how the remains were found, it showed that it was a disorganized crime scene. For one, Chandra's remains were just left at the crime scene and this showed that the criminal act committed on her was ``spontaneous'' --elements that showed this was a disorganized crime scene.
As to the physical evidence left at the potential crime scenes, there were the bones of Chandra which were scattered around. Missing from the crime scene though was the murder weapon that would help determine the cause of death.
C. Forensic Findings
Medical examiners used the remains of Chandra to get to the bottom of her mysterious death. To identify her, they used dental records of Chandra to see if it the teeth matched the skull found at the park. It was a match.
The results of the autopsy of her skeletal remains were inconclusive, with medical examiners unable to say the cause of her death given that her body had long decomposed.
They also did not find marks that would say she was shot or stabbed or even strangled.
Was Chandra sexually assaulted? The only physical evidence had to do with the way some articles of her clothing were found. For instance, her thong and black pants were ``turned inside out,'' suggesting that they were being removed by her attacker.
II. Investigative Considerations
The initial stages of the investigation focused on finding Chandra. The search started with authorities going to her apartment where they went through her things. Among the main discovery they had was her laptop and they sought the help of experts to look into the contents there in a bid to find clues on where she may be. Through the examination of her laptop, the police was able to find out websites Chandra last visited and this included trails in Rock Creek Park.
Though the police went to Chandra's apartment building, it failed to immediately gain access to surveillance tapes there. By the time the police thought about such vital evidence, the surveillance tapes had already been erased.
With information that Chandra may have possibly gone to Rock Creek Park, authorities searched the area. But because police instructions were not clear to the search team, they failed to cover key areas there and thus, missed out the area where Chandra's remains were.
Simultaneous with their physical search, authorities also resorted to questioning people close to Chandra who led them to Condit and the discovery of their relationship. But the police had from the very start zeroed in on Condit as a possible suspect to Chandra's disappearance, thus failing to consider the possibility that there could be other suspects.
III. Conclusion
There were several mistakes and blunders that investigators made in their search initially for Chandra and eventually of her murderer. These included the belated move of the police to secure surveillance tapes from Chandra's apartment building which is needed to help them find out the last time she was there. By securing the tapes immediately, they would have gotten the tapes before they were erased.
Police also erred when they took it upon themselves to look into the contents of her laptop which prevented them to get immediately vital information such as the last websites she logged into. The police should have relied on experts to do the job so there would be any bungling.
And then the biggest mistake was of course the police intense focus on Condit as a possible suspect to Chandra's disappearance.
It was this heavy focus on Condit by the police that affected the way the investigation was eventually conducted. For one, the police did not connect her disappearance to sexual attacks in Rock Creek Park that happened during the time she disappeared. Had they looked into this angle, they would have seen that Chandra had similarity to two other women who were assaulted by Guandique –all were either jogging or walking the trails in the park all alone.
They also did not interview immediately the two women joggers victimized by Guandique. Had they done so, investigators would have considered the possibility that Chandra was a possible victim of random attack at the park.
It was also unfortunate that park police did not report to investigators that Guandique had told them he had seen Chandra at the park. This vital information would have led to the early discovery of Chandra's remains in the park.
Police also bungled its search for Chandra's remains when they did not cover all possible areas in the park. It took the private investigators hired by Chandra's family to discover there were still other remains of Chandra in other parts of the park.
They will have a tough job to prove Guandique's participation in Chandra's death due to the fact that medical examiners were unable to determine her cause of death. Prosecutors would also have to contend with the fact that no witnesses had been found to support the theory that Guandique murdered Chandra. They also have to contend with the fact that there was no physical evidence linking Guandique to Chandra's murder.
So far, what the prosecutors have are claims of some inmates in the same jail with Guandique that the murder suspect had told them he had killed Chandra. They will have a hard time convincing the judge about the claims made by these inmates who were seen as not being credible enough.
Another major challenge for the prosecutors was defending how the police bungled and missed out vital evidence in the investigation should the defense team raise these police blunders during the trial.
REFERENCES:
Higham, S., & Horwitz, S. (2010). Finding Chandra. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.
