Sunday, February 22, 2009

killer found in chandra levy case - about time

So 8 years after Chandra Levy went missing, police in Washington D.C. finally think they have the guy who killed her. And, no, it's not Gary Condit. Although, admit it, even YOU thought that he either had someone put a hit out on her or perhaps did it himself, to keep Levy quiet from spreading news of their affair.

Nope. Nothing of the sort.

The suspected killer is Ingmar Guandique, a now 27-year-old Salvadoran immigrant who was in jail for attacking 2 women in the same park in 2002.

Okay, so the guy attacks 2 women in the same park a year after Chandra is missing. Around the same time a jogger stumbles upon bones and a skull that are Levy's. Police at that time DON'T question Guandique about the Levy case, but instead brush it under the rug?? All the while Condit has sat guilty as can be, losing his political career? Not fair.

From the AP story cited below:

"One of his victims in the park attacks, Halle Shilling, told The Washington Post that new prosecutors and detectives apologized to her because prior investigators had never interviewed her in the Levy case.

"They said they were so sorry it took so long to talk to me," Shilling said. "They really want to get to the bottom of this, and they are not going to sleep well until they get a conviction.""

So let me get this straight. A girl gets attacked in the SAME PARK where Chandra Levy was last seen jogging and no one interviews her about the Levy Case? Even AFTER Levy's remains were found? Then the cops give the "sorry it took so long to talk to me" line. This is police work at its WORST. This was NOT a cold case. Not even lukewarm.

Condit deserves ONE BIG, GIANT, WET APOLOGY. Affairs and infidelity aside, a man does NOT deserve to be seen as a murderer when police had the right guy under their noses all along.

I'll start: Mr. Condit, I am very sorry that all these years I had you pegged as Chandra's killer. Shame on me.


Okay, now it's your turn.


Read the full story here.


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I apologise, but, in my opinion, you are not right. I can prove it.