Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CHANDRA KILLING NOT A RANDOM ATTACK: D.C. DETECTIVES
NY Post ^ | May 26, 2002 | NILES LATHEM and ANDY GELLER

Posted on 05/26/2002 1:40:49 AM PDT by stlnative

Edited on 05/26/2004 5:06:34 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

May 26, 2002 -- Investigators believe Chandra Levy was lured to her death by someone she knew or slain by a predator who methodically stalked her, police sources said yesterday.

Evidence collected at the spot where her remains were found points away from her being killed in a random attack while she was jogging, the sources said.


(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: chandra; condit; levy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 601-620621-640641-660661-664 next last
To: Old Lady
Thanks, old lady (that just seems so odd to be saying!) ... more from the Sacramento Bee on Sunday, May 26, 2002:

The 19th century mansion, now used for park offices and storage, is about two miles north of her apartment and almost a mile north of Condit's former apartment."

641 posted on 05/28/2002 8:39:04 AM PDT by Pegita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 623 | View Replies]

To: Pegita
Reply 641: Of course I don't know any more than anyone else, but I think the location of the mansion in proximity to Chandra Levy and Condit's apts has nothing to do with anything.

Inbetween these 3 locations is a city - many city streets, traffic, lots of buildings, just like any other city. I never see this pointed out.

The only special meaning that occurs to me is they both lived in the Northwest section of DC where Rock Creek Park is, and since Condit biked through Rock Creek Park a lot he was probably familiar with the Klingle mansion.

642 posted on 05/28/2002 10:04:29 AM PDT by Old Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 641 | View Replies]

To: SarahW
"He didn't want to harm them"

I'm confused, I thought you believed he had already killed Chandra?

643 posted on 05/28/2002 11:01:54 AM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 635 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
I guess he conpromised. Didn't want to haul too early, or too late!
644 posted on 05/28/2002 11:03:07 AM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 639 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Maybe he waited until he got word from a leak somewhere to if it actually was her body? He may have known she was dead, but did not know where his "clean up person" disposed of the body????????
645 posted on 05/28/2002 12:17:03 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 644 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
You deleted the last word of that sentence, and changed the meaning of what I wrote.
646 posted on 05/28/2002 12:47:25 PM PDT by SarahW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]

To: SarahW
Sincerely, sorry. I didn't understand the difference. He was going to save them for later?

We'll just have to disagree on this jerk; I expect the police will tell us soon that his not a suspect. There are rumors floating around that he had an airtight alibi, but I don't what it is.

I do know that Gary had a real problem on his hands.

647 posted on 05/28/2002 3:02:54 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 646 | View Replies]

bttt
648 posted on 05/28/2002 5:08:45 PM PDT by Pagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Killing them right away would take all the fun out of it. Even rapists who plan to torture and kill don't do it right off the bat. The first victim, he wasn't successful knocking her off the path. The second victim, he had more luck with. He got her off the path and into a ravine. But she struggled instead of complied. And when she felt his grip lessen she broke free and was able to get up and run away.
649 posted on 05/28/2002 6:10:10 PM PDT by SarahW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
And about that "airtight alibi" rumor - I think *you* started in by telling people he was incarcerated when Chandra was killed.
650 posted on 05/28/2002 6:12:07 PM PDT by SarahW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies]

To: SarahW
You really have it in for me don't you. I was quoting another Freeper that said "he" which I took to mean Ingmar. I apologied. You're very determined to be right, aren't you. Don't let logic and facts get in your way.

PS I heard the "alibi" rumor mentioned atleast twice on TV today. Shame your guy Gary didn't win.

651 posted on 05/28/2002 6:42:49 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 650 | View Replies]

To: SarahW
...the stretch in all this is when tying to figure how condit was not involved...
652 posted on 05/28/2002 6:49:21 PM PDT by alrea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 634 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr
A DC cop said that she looked up the park on her computer.The mansion comes up on the home page. He said "we never said she looked up the mansion". I do not know what to make of this statment.
653 posted on 05/28/2002 7:10:08 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 610 | View Replies]

To: Old Lady
There is also a chemical company in Luray. It has some connection to Condit. Its some sort of farm chem that will destroy a cadaver in a short amout of time. I think he voted for some bill that was very lucrative to this company.For about the last month the press had been saying if only the Levy family could at least find Chandras body.I think that is what made the killer put the body in the park. Just as soon it was announced that the body was Chandra, Condits lawyer states that this will totally exonerate his client. How does he know this.I think whoever did this was trying to clear Condit by putting Chandra in the park and trying to make it look like somone else did it.
654 posted on 05/28/2002 7:21:31 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 621 | View Replies]

To: SarahW
was he or was he not incarcerated when Chandra was killed?
655 posted on 05/28/2002 7:28:04 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 650 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
Ann Rule was a policewoman in Washington and Oregon who now writes about murder cases,
giving background on the murderers, police investigations and victims lives. Interesting stuff
and it's enlightening to see patterns of behavior among murderers.
656 posted on 05/28/2002 8:57:43 PM PDT by jwalburg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: SarahW
WP "Law enforcement sources said yesterday that police strongly discounted Guandique as a suspect after interviewing him last year -- and after he passed a polygraph test."
657 posted on 05/28/2002 11:26:40 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 649 | View Replies]

To: dalebert
No, he was not incarcerated on May 1.
658 posted on 05/29/2002 5:56:43 AM PDT by SarahW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 655 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Some of us question the reliability of polygraph examinations.
659 posted on 05/29/2002 5:58:15 AM PDT by SarahW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 657 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I'm not after you.
660 posted on 05/29/2002 6:03:40 AM PDT by SarahW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 651 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 601-620621-640641-660661-664 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson