Posted on 05/30/2002 12:01:23 PM PDT by Registered
Was the ring found, or not?
It doesn't matter. What matters is when it was put there. And.....has the size been changed on it to fit Condit? Maybe that is why the ring wasn't on her finger when they found her. Even with decomposition, wouldn't the ring still be around her finger? If it were planted later, it wouldn't necessarily be on her body. I doubt anyone would find great pleasure in touching a decaying body.
It doesn't matter. What matters is when it was put there. And.....has the size been changed on it to fit Condit? Maybe that is why the ring wasn't on her finger when they found her. Even with decomposition, wouldn't the ring still be around her finger? If it were planted later, it wouldn't necessarily be on her body. I doubt anyone would find great pleasure in touching a decaying body.
July 10, 2001: Chief Ramsey announced that the police would search Condit's apartment, obtain a DNA sample, and administer a polygraph exam to Condit. Condit was seen suspiciously placing something in a trashcan in Alexandria, VA. A report was made to the police. The investigation found a watchbox for a Tag Hauer watch they traced back to Joleen Argentini-McKay. The watchcase was packed inside a Big Mac container. Condit's senior staffer Mike Dayton drove the car. Police later confirmed with Bureau of Prisons co-workers that Chandra wore a man's Tag Hauer watch.
From 11:15 PM to 3 AM the next morning investigators searched Condit's apartment
If the picture was taken at the time he made his confessional in July,,,,, just maybe he did wear the "C" "L" ("Condit" "Levy") ring. Where better to hide something than in plain view????
Also it would probably be the best way to get something out of a place the police are searching. No investigator had any desire to go near Condit. I certainly can't see any investigator asking about, let alone noticing it.
Haven't been able to locate it today.
I didn't see the ring in the second photo...but closer view of the pic shows a distortion in the area (also on the pad of the thumb.)
If the first photo can be linked from a news site, I'm a complete believer!
If it's the same ring...
Chandra may have given it to him. He may be wearing it in some kind of dopey attachment to her.
He may have taken it off her body. Why? Thinking that it would deter identification of her (not well thought out plan, but such happens a lot in the panic of crime). He may have taken it off to make it look like a robbery, along with the watch, but in dopey sentimentality kept the ring. Remember, he thinks he's smarter than everyone else. Might also be a Sherlock Holmesian psychology, that criminals unconsciously want to be caught, so they give clues.
As for the watch, he may hide the box to stave off a connection to the watch. But if the watch was not found, and he disposed of the watch elsewhere, why would the box be such a big deal? On the other hand, if the type of watch was publicized before, and with the threat of a search, he recognized there was a piece of evidence in his home connecting him to a "Tag Heuer". His incompetent disposal of the box may be sherlock holmsian too.
Or, maybe, creepy/guilty son of a preacher man he is, he is just covering up his affairs in his blundering way.
Many permutations and possibilities. Ping me on ring stories.
Interestingly, the Modesto Bee story today about the ring pairs a photo of the design of the ring with a pic of Gary - and of all the pics possible, they use the second Karate Chop one. Is the editor saying something to us???
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.