Prosecutors in the murder of federal intern Chandra Levy gave up on Friday in their five-year battle with defense attorneys for convicted murderer Ingmar Guandik. In the years after Guandique's conviction, the defense argued that key testimony from its client's former cellmate was misleading and led a jury to sentence him to 60 years in prison. This week, U.S. prosecutors said they would not block an attempt by Guandique's lawyers to seek a new trial to clear his name.
Guandique was previously convicted in 2002 of attacking two female joggers in the same area where Levy's body was found. Prosecutors believe Guandique has a history of violence against women, which is consistent with the murderer Levy's modus operandi. Combined with the scathing testimony of inmate Armando Morales, the jury easily secured a conviction. Morales, a convicted drug dealer and gang member, shared a cell with Guandique in 2006. Now Guandique's lawyers claim they have uncovered evidence that Morales concocted his story to curry favor with prosecutors.
In a statement on Friday, Acting U.S. Attorney Vincent Cohen and Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Ann Gerardo defended the preliminary conviction and asked the D.C. Criminal Division Superior Court in two weeks to A status hearing will be held in a timely manner to determine whether Guandique will be allowed to appear in court. Second trial.
"We remain convinced that the jury's verdict was correct and are preparing for a new trial to ensure Guandique is held accountable," they said. They cast doubt on the defense's assumption that Morales lied in his testimony. They continued:
The government remains confident the jury's verdict was correct. The Government also believes that none of the thousands of pages of information regarding the defendants' prosecutions by Mr. Morales and USAO-DC, nor anything else revealed by the government's comprehensive posttrial investigation, casts doubt on the defendants' guilt. Murder of Chandra Levy.
In 2001, Chandra Levy had been working as a paid federal intern at the Federal Bureau of Prisons in Washington, D.C., when in May of that year she received a disturbing call from her parents claiming that she had not received her check in for five days. After hearing the news about her, she disappeared. The initial search effort was ruled a failure.
Nearly a year later, in May 2002, the Washington, D.C., Police Department announced to the public that they had discovered skeletal remains matching Levy's dental records near Rock Creek Park in North Washington, D.C. Further examination confirmed that the remains belonged to Levy.
Shockingly, police later revealed that Levy had been having an affair with married California congressman Gary Condit, a Democrat who was 30 years her senior. When Condit was asked about the incident and possible connection to the murder, he vehemently denied his involvement and sued Vanity Fair investigative reporter Dominick Dunne for $11 million in 2005. The reasoning is that Condit knows more than he is letting on. They later settled out of court.
Condit's connection to the puzzling case, however vague, could have hurt his unsuccessful re-election chances in 2002, but he was never formally charged and later withdrew from the spotlight entirely. After Guandique was convicted in 2010, the case was considered closed.
Defenders lobbying for Guandique questioned that on Friday.
"The government's case against Ingmar Guandique is based on lies," defense attorney Jon Anderson said in a statement. "We are pleased that the government now acknowledges that it cannot defend this conviction, and we look forward to defending it in a new trial." Justice is served.”
The case of Chandra Levy has baffled many in the years since Guandique was convicted because prosecutors lacked forensic evidence linking him to Levy's death. Internet logs that could provide additional evidence were also accidentally corrupted when an investigator without training in computer skills attempted to search her history.
In a 2010 court report, Newsweek called the Levy case "an egregious series of police mistakes" and claimed that both the media and police were responsible for Condit's softball treatment. Embarrassingly, nearly 13 months passed between the time Levy disappeared and her remains were publicly discovered by a jogger taking her dog for a walk, allowing wind and rain to completely erase all forensic data from her bones. And that data could have told investigators exactly how she died.
If Guandique's lawyers are allowed a second trial, they will no doubt bring all this to light. But for Levy's mother, even if she still can't be sure whether Guandique actually committed the murder, a second trial will not change anything.
"I've always had questions," Susan Levy told The Associated Press in a phone interview. "[But] it won't make any difference to me because my daughter is dead."
Image: Getty Images (3)
