Replies

In regards as to whether Condit did it or some serial killer...i'm inclined to think it was Condit for serveral reasons. One, a lot of things were happening in their relationship at that time and little of it to the congressman's liking. Apparently, if i remember correctly, Chandra had or was going to confront Condit's wife about the relationship and maybe she was even pressuring Condit to get a divorce so they could get married. Something along those lines anyway. And so Condit had motivation to get rid of her and to protect his, ahem, reputation as an upstanding family man. Another thing is that i recall hearing a report that said police dogs had sniffed Chandra's scent from her apartment to the curb where the trail suddenly disappeared. If that's the case, then she had gotten into a vehicle with someone she knew and they were planning to go somewhere together. Presumeably the park that's in the news today. So all of this coupled with Condit's suspicious activity afterwards (ie, throwing away things connected with her) leads me to still consider him as the most likely person to have both the opportunity and the motive to get rid of her. A random killer, maybe, but to me there are just too many coincidences what with their relationship hitting a crucial juncture at around that time and Condit doing everything possible to hinder the investigation of someone he supposedly cared a great deal about and (i just remembered this) the reports that he requested his girlfriends not carry ID's with them when they were together and Chandra apparently didn't take her purse with her. It just seems a little too bizarre, too deus ex machina if you will, that she would have been randomly killed just then.

It just seems a little too bizarre, too deus ex machina if you will, that she would have been randomly killed just then.

Of course Condit should be the prime suspect, but now that Chandra's body has been found, there're going to be plenty of people coming out of the woodwork with "red herring" theories about a "serial killer"---we're seeing it right here on this thread. I'm getting the impression that much more than Gary Condit's reputation and freedom are at stake here. These days, in political terms, not only is it a constant struggle just to see what's right in front of you as George Orwell complained, but there's a whole industry of people out there trying to convince the general public to discount the obvious. As Groucho Marx once said, "Who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?"