I. Case Summary
Chandra Levy, a 24-year-old intern from California, went missing on May 1, 2001 as she was preparing to return to her hometown of Modesto after undergoing a seven-month internship in Washington DC. Chandra’s disappearance drew much public and media attention after it was learned that she had been having an affair with a congressman of her hometown of Modesto, 52-year-old Gary Condit.
The police had focused its investigation on Condit who had denied any involvement in Chandra's disappearance but had admitted to having an affair with her. But as the police searched for Chandra's whereabouts, it committed several mistakes in its investigation, including missing out on some critical leads that could have earlier led them to where the intern was. This included the fact that it took exactly a year before Chandra's remains were found not by the police but by a man who happened to stumble on them as he went hiking at Rock Creek Park. But even with the discovery of Chandra's remains, it took the police six more years to finally focus its attention to a new suspect, this time 19-year-old El Salvador-born Ingmar Adalid Guandique who had been in jail since 2001 after he was convicted for attacking two women joggers at the park shortly after Chandra disappeared.
Actually, Guandique's name had cropped up in the police investigation early on and prosecutors had also started to look at him as a possible suspect. Police only stepped up its investigation in 2008 especially when the Washington Post newspaper came out with a series of reports that included its findings that Chandra was apparently a victim of a random attack at the park and Guandique may have something to do with it. Guandique denied any involvement in the killing of Chandra although he had told fellow inmates several versions of his involvement in her death. Since last year, Guandique had been charged for the murder of Chandra and his trial continues to this day.
II. Investigation analysiss
A. Victimology
Chandra can be considered a high risk victim due to the circumstance that she found herself in on that fateful day of May 1, 2001. She had set out alone to hike and walked towards an isolated path at Rock Creek Park. She was also listening to music and seemed unguarded when she made her way there, making her vulnerable to anyone who may have something not good in mind. She also did not inform anyone where she was heading on that fateful day.
Since her laptop showed that she had visited websites on nearby trails in the area, including Rock Creek Park, police investigators should have also concentrated their search there. There was indeed a search in the park but authorities did not give clear instructions and consequently, did not cover the area well. Thereby they missed out the spot where Chandra lay dead.
B. Crime Scene Assessment
There were at least three potential crime scenes in the case of Chandra. These included Rock Creek Park, the actual crime scene, where her remains were found and unearth; Chandra's apartment and her boyfriend Condit's apartment.
Chandra's apartment
When police started to look for Chandra, they went to her apartment, a possible crime scene, to find out for clues where she may be. Chandra's apartment was found to be strewn with items that included dirty clothes in a laundry bag and her laptop. These two items provided evidence to the police as they tested one of her clothes for DNA when it was found to be containing semen. Police also looked at her laptop to find out that she was working on or websites she looked into when she last used it.
There are also surveillance cameras in her apartment building where the access of video recordings on the day Levy went missing could help investigators. They also collected file.
Condit's apartment
It was a potential crime scene because Chandra spent time there with Condit. Police searched the congressman's apartment and collected fibers and hair of Chandra.
Rock Creek Park
This is the actual crime scene. They found Chandra's skull in an isolated ravine near the trail. They also found bones strewn in the ravine. They found her Walkman and clothes, including her bra, pants and sweatshirt. But the initial search of the police resulted with them missing out other parts of her remains. It was private investigators hired by Chandra's family who found more pieces of her bones when they expanded their search to other parts of the crime scene. Police officials were infuriated because they missed out many bones in their initial search. They explained that apparently animals scavenged and scattered her bones through the years.
C. Forensic Findings
Using the skull found at the park, medical examiners were able to determine Chandra's identity by matching dental records given to them by her family more than a year after her disappearance.
An autopsy was done on Chandra's skeletal remains but results were inconclusive. Medical examiners couldn't determine the cause of her death because had body had decomposed by then. There was no more tissue and only her bones remain.
Medical examiners did not find any bullet hole, slash or stab marks on her bones and there was no depressions or fractures on her skull. They also could not determine whether she was strangled because their examination of her hyboid bone (found in the upper neck) was inconclusive.
As for whether Chandra was sexually assaulted by her assailant, the only physical evidence that could show that she had been sexually assaulted were the black thong ``turned inside out'' and black stretch pants ``also turned inside out, knotted at the bottom. This seemed to indicate that they were taken down by her assailant.
D. Investigative Considerations
Police initially tried to find Chandra by searching her apartment for items that could help locate her, including the laptop that she left behind.
They also questioned the people she was associating. with and checked her cell phone records. Among the people investigators questioned were Condit and two male colleagues of Chandra – Sven Jones and Robert Kirkjian. Jones was a fellow intern and who had worked out with her in the gym. Kirijian, on the other hand, was a friend whom Chandra had confided in about her relationship with a member of Congress.
They also questioned Chandra's aunt who had informed them that Chandra told her she was having an affair with Condit. After they were able to determine from her laptop the websites she last looked into before she disappeared, investigators looked into Rock Creek Park. They also formed a team to search the area but since they did not give clear instructions on the coverage of the search, they missed out the spot where Chandra's remains lay.
But the investigators focused their attention on Condit after the congressman admitted he had a romantic affair with Chandra. They searched his apartment for clues that could lead to Chandra's whereabouts.
They also interviewed him on three separate occasions and the latter stuck to his story that the last time he saw Chandra was before his wife went to Washington DC. Investigators also took a DNA sample from Condit after they found semen in one of the clothes Chandra had placed in a laundry bag.
Looking at the way investigators did their work during the initial stage, they did not dig deeper such as asking for surveillance tapes in Chandra's apartment.They also focused their probe on Condit when they should have looked at possible suspects. They should have done process of elimination in Condit's case.
III. Conclusion
A. Lessons Learned
As pointed out in the series of reports published by the Washington Post on Chandra's murder, the police investigation on her disappearance was marred with errors and ``helped blind (them)'' to the possibility that someone other than Condit was behind her disappearance.
Among the lapses committed included:
The failure of police to immediately secure surveillance videotapes from Chandra's apartment building which could have helped pinpoint the time she left the premises. Investigators should have sought the tapes immediately when they went to the apartment so that these would not have been erased as had been the policy of the apartment management.
The mishandling of the examination of Chandra's computer which prevented police from immediately finding out that she could have gone to Rock Creek Park, as this was one of the websites she visited before she logged off from her laptop for the last time. Investigators should have let computers experts run her laptop to do the searching.
The failure of the police to connect Chandra's disappearance and other sexual attacks in Rock Creek Park. Investigators should have looked into deeper Guandique's involvement since he was a suspect in the sexual attacks of two women joggers in the park shortly after Chandra disappeared.
The failure of park police to report Guandique's statements to them that he had seen Chandra in the park, two months after her disappearance. Park police should have reported Guandique's reference to Chandra to investigators, especially since her disappearance got so much media attention at that time.
The failure of authorities to interview right away the two women joggers who Guandique had attacked in the park. They should have looked into the accounts of the two women . would have led to them discovering the possibility that Chandra was a victim of random attack at the park
The failure of authorities to properly do their job in their initial search for Chandra in the park which led to them missing the spot where her remains were eventually found. They should have made their instructions clear to cover all spots and therefore found her remains sooner than later and thus somehow help preserve the crime scene.
The failure to use a bilingual polygrapher in the examinations of Guandique and fellow inmate Ramon Alvarez, who are both Spanish-speaking. They should have gotten someone who could speak Spanish to understand
The failure of the police to get right away statements from Guandique's girlfriend and her mother on the violent tendencies of the former. This could have helped put a profile on Guandique and raise the possibility that he could be a suspect.
B. Trial Summary
Police finally charged Guandique for the first degree murder of Chandra. But prosecutors have a tough time ahead of them. The case has now a new prosecution team led by Amanda Haines and Fernando Campoamor. The prosecutors would find it difficult to prove their case that Guandique was behind Chandra's murder. For one, medical examiners have never determined the cause of Chandra's death considering that her remains were so badly decomposed.
There was also the fact that there were no witnesses to Chandra's case and no physical evidence that will connect Guandique to the scene. There was also no evidence of accomplices. Prosecutors will also have a hard time getting straight Guandique's many versions that he killed Chandra especially since some of the inmates who informed authorities about Guandique's accounts may have a credibility problem.
The way the police bungled and missed out vital evidence and clues during the initial search for Chandra will likely be raised during the trial proper. There was also the fact that the defense team may raise the testimony made in 2002 of the original prosecutor and judge that they did not believe Guandique was responsible for Chandra's disappearance.
REFERENCES:
Higham, S., & Horwitz, S. (2010). Finding Chandra. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.
