Witness in Chandra Levy case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else find it weird that some no-name actress recorded multiple conversations with a felon?

She says he threatened her ex-husband, so she "distanced" herself from him by subsequently secretly recording lots of conversations with him so that if anything happened to her ex she wouldn't be blamed. WTF? Call the police. Tell your ex. But common sense would tell you stay away from a creepy ex-con.

Oddly, she was a background character on House of Cards:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7493495/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

Sorry, not following you??

From the recent Post article, linked twice in this thread,
"Babs Proller met the man when she was living in a Maryland hotel...She soon learned that her new acquaintance, Armando Morales, was a convicted felon and former gang member, recently released after decades in prison. He was also the star witness in one of the Washington area’s most sensational murder trials."

"During their conversations, Proller said, Morales had threatened to hurt her ex-husband, which prompted her to begin recording their discussions. Proller said she thought the recordings could protect her and she didn’t want to be implicated in any crimes against her ex-husband..."

[Anonymous]

What's also weird is that this Babs woman sent cell phone picture of this guy's prison ID to the Washington Post. She also contacted Sharon Levy (Chandra's mother) about these conversations. Levy's mother contacted police.

She's trying to make herself out to be some good Samaritan for coming forward. But why contact the press and a murder victim's grieving mother and not just go directly to the police? Bizarre, attention seeking behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will they be charging Condit?

The prosecutor, acc to the news, said this did not change the fact that Condit had been absolved long ago. We will see.

I thought Condit's lawyer said it didn't change the fact....

For what it's worth, I don't think he did it, but I do still remember how the cops found him driving all the way to Alexandria to throw something away (what was it?) in a park, so maybe...

I thought the prosecution was interviewing two other women who had had affairs with Condit?

Yes, and they both said that Condit liked rough bondage. Indique's lawyer was going to bring this up, which is important because they found her tights knotted up near her body.

Her tights?? Who brings rights on a run?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will they be charging Condit?

The prosecutor, acc to the news, said this did not change the fact that Condit had been absolved long ago. We will see.

I thought Condit's lawyer said it didn't change the fact....

For what it's worth, I don't think he did it, but I do still remember how the cops found him driving all the way to Alexandria to throw something away (what was it?) in a park, so maybe...

I thought the prosecution was interviewing two other women who had had affairs with Condit?

Yes, and they both said that Condit liked rough bondage. Indique's lawyer was going to bring this up, which is important because they found her tights knotted up near her body.

Her tights?? Who brings rights on a run?

Exactly. You would dress in tights (and look cute) if you were going to meet someone you were seeing. Not if you went for a jog.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will they be charging Condit?

The prosecutor, acc to the news, said this did not change the fact that Condit had been absolved long ago. We will see.

I thought Condit's lawyer said it didn't change the fact....

For what it's worth, I don't think he did it, but I do still remember how the cops found him driving all the way to Alexandria to throw something away (what was it?) in a park, so maybe...

I thought the prosecution was interviewing two other women who had had affairs with Condit?

Yes, and they both said that Condit liked rough bondage. Indique's lawyer was going to bring this up, which is important because they found her tights knotted up near her body.

Her tights?? Who brings rights on a run?

Exactly. You would dress in tights (and look cute) if you were going to meet someone you were seeing. Not if you went for a jog.

They were running tights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will they be charging Condit?

The prosecutor, acc to the news, said this did not change the fact that Condit had been absolved long ago. We will see.

I thought Condit's lawyer said it didn't change the fact....

For what it's worth, I don't think he did it, but I do still remember how the cops found him driving all the way to Alexandria to throw something away (what was it?) in a park, so maybe...

I thought the prosecution was interviewing two other women who had had affairs with Condit?

Yes, and they both said that Condit liked rough bondage. Indique's lawyer was going to bring this up, which is important because they found her tights knotted up near her body.

Her tights?? Who brings rights on a run?

Exactly. You would dress in tights (and look cute) if you were going to meet someone you were seeing. Not if you went for a jog.

They were running tights.

What are running tights? Like leggings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will they be charging Condit?

The prosecutor, acc to the news, said this did not change the fact that Condit had been absolved long ago. We will see.

I thought Condit's lawyer said it didn't change the fact....

For what it's worth, I don't think he did it, but I do still remember how the cops found him driving all the way to Alexandria to throw something away (what was it?) in a park, so maybe...

I thought the prosecution was interviewing two other women who had had affairs with Condit?

Yes, and they both said that Condit liked rough bondage. Indique's lawyer was going to bring this up, which is important because they found her tights knotted up near her body.

Her tights?? Who brings rights on a run?

Exactly. You would dress in tights (and look cute) if you were going to meet someone you were seeing. Not if you went for a jog.

They were running tights.

What are running tights? Like leggings?

And keds? Makes no sense

[Anonymous]

This was in 2000. Did folk wear full on gear for a casual jog?

[Anonymous]

They typically wore running shoes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was in 2000. Did folk wear full on gear for a casual jog?

I've never seen anyone running in Keds. Why would you go through the hassle of putting running tights on and then wear Keds?? And what was with the lipstick?

Something doesn't sound right at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was in 2000. Did folk wear full on gear for a casual jog?

I assume that she had to drive to that location with the intent to go for a run/jog. It's not like she was just jogging casually across a college campus - from class to dorm. Or from her work building to the metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was in 2000. Did folk wear full on gear for a casual jog?

I've never seen anyone running in Keds. Why would you go through the hassle of putting running tights on and then wear Keds?? And what was with the lipstick?

Something doesn't sound right at all.

Agree. And supposedly she worked out a lot. Surely she had some sort of athletic shoes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was in 2000. Did folk wear full on gear for a casual jog?

I've never seen anyone running in Keds. Why would you go through the hassle of putting running tights on and then wear Keds?? And what was with the lipstick?

Something doesn't sound right at all.

Agree. And supposedly she worked out a lot. Surely she had some sort of athletic shoes?

She did. They found them back at her apartment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was in 2000. Did folk wear full on gear for a casual jog?

I've never seen anyone running in Keds. Why would you go through the hassle of putting running tights on and then wear Keds?? And what was with the lipstick?

Something doesn't sound right at all.

Agree. And supposedly she worked out a lot. Surely she had some sort of athletic shoes?

She did. They found them back at her apartment.

Well, that's really odd, then.

[Anonymous]

DCUM "sleuths"

Chandra Levy went missing in May 2001. Her skeletal remains weren’t found until 2002. There was little forensic evidence after such long a time. The trial wasn’t until 2010!

She lived in Dupont Circle and most likely killed in Rock Creek Park in May. Her internship was over; she was due to be leave for California. Her last internet searches include Baskin-Robbins and the Pierce-Kringle Mansion in RCP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_Levy#cite_note-WP01-Disappears-7

The clothes found among the remains were: a sports bra, sweat shirt, leggings and tennis shoes—not Keds. (This isn’t an episode of Veronica Mars.) Her purse was found at her apartment which makes me think she wasn’t meeting anyone, she was just out for a run enjoying nice weather.
http://web.archive.org/web/20080429000151/http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2002/0528/levy_ap.html

What we do know is...

Ingmar Guandique is a scum bag, gang member, and convicted of assaulting at least 2 other women in Rock Creek Park. Maybe he killed her in an assault; maybe he left her to die, maybe he didn’t. Is he capable, yes—he’s has a violent track record of attacking women in RCP: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chandra-levy-update-two-survivors-of-similar-attacks-testify-against-murder-defendant-ingmar-guandique/

Gary Condict is a scum bag for…
1. cheating on his wife
2. cheating with a young intern
3. obstructing justice—lying about the affair to authorities, trying to destroy evidence b/c he cared more about his job than the life of someone with whom he was sleeping
4. having creepy sexual proclivities
Did he kill her? Who knows? Was he capable? Probably he’s a lying, cheating scum bag. As a pussy and Congressman, would he have risked attacking her in broad daylight in RCP—probably not.

Armando Morales is a scumbag, convicted felon, jailhouse informant, and key witness against Gauandique . Who knows if he was lying about the confession or he was lying to some woman who was surreptitiously recording him after the fact.

At least her family has some kind of closure b/c they ultimately found her remains, but whether her killer is getting off on a technicality or if they never actually caught the perpetrator will never have an answer.