The Crime Scene - To Serve and Inform

Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 1:47 PM ET, 11/15/2010

Some charges dropped in Levy case

By Henry Cauvin

A day before the case against Ingmar Guandique is expected to go to the jury, prosecutors have dropped the kidnapping and attempted robbery charges that had been filed in the death of Chandra Levy.

The statute of limitations on the kidnapping and robbery charges had run out and so Guandique could not have been convicted of either offense. But because the charge of felony murder is predicated on a serious crime, such as robbery, prosecutors had to prove an underlying felony for each felony murder count, and the U.S. attorney's office had originally charged those underlying felonies as well.

Earlier in the trial, prosecutors dropped an attempted sexual abuse charge and the related felony murder charge. But that decision came after they elected not to call a witness whose testimony was supposed to support the sexual assault charge.

When the case goes to the jury, most likely Tuesday afternoon, Guandique will face two counts of felony murder.


By Henry Cauvin  | November 15, 2010; 1:47 PM ET
Categories:  Chandra Levy, From the Courthouse, Homicide  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Two charged in Sunday Sterling assault
Next: Photo of baby found near church released

Comments

I hope no one remembers the stupidity when the chief of police said Guandique was not considered a suspect. Way to get caught up on the dead-end Condit trail instead of actually looking for who killed her.

Posted by: thelaw1 | November 15, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

@ thelaw1 Who do you think killed her?

Posted by: MrsJLB1 | November 15, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

if the d.c. cops, the national park police & the f.b.i. had done their jobs more than 9 years ago ingmar guandique would be facing the death penalty right now instead of maybe getting life-without-parole! if gary condit hadn't lied about chandra being his mistress then the authorities would've left him alone! all these bastards contributed to the incompetence, negligence & corruption of this crime scene being solved by 5/31/01! ingmar is chandra's killer & condit led her astray!

Posted by: gailschumacher | November 15, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

I don't believe Guandique did it and I really don't think Sandra Levy's parents think so either.

Posted by: PublicEnemy1 | November 15, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

PublicEnemy1,

Her name was Chandra, not Sandra--just one of several things you got completely wrong.

Posted by: hisroc | November 15, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

I appears, from the news coverage, that the trial has lacked a lot of evidence to convict Guandique. It is a real shame that the case took so long to develop, but I don't feel you should convict anyone unless they have been proved guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. The prosecution keeps dropping charges, which suggests the weakness of their case.

Posted by: 189AROD | November 15, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

I do not understand why there is one victim and one suspect and two counts of felony murder.

PublicEnemy1, it's okay to call her Sandra. That's a simple error.

You're not the one who completely screwed up the investigation of her death from the very first day.

Posted by: blasmaic | November 15, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse


my money's still on gary condit.

his behavior after chandra levy's disappearance was not the behavior of an innocent man.

it was gary condit's lucky day when the 9/11 attacks blew his cloud of suspicion off the front pages.

Posted by: potomacfever00 | November 15, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

How convenient. They charge someone who's already locked up, they have no physical evidence, all they have is the testimony of a convicted felon..if the jury has any common sense, they'll vote for acquittal and be done in ten minutes..
Who did it? Condit? If they had any evidence against him they would have charged him. Perhaps the knuclehead who said Condit's behavior was not that "of an innocent man" would care to define exactly what that might be.

Posted by: markappraiser1 | November 15, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse


markappraiser1, try this on for size:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/specials/chandra/ch8_2.html

Posted by: potomacfever00 | November 15, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Re: Condit

If stupid made you guilty all of congress would be in jail. And Condit is nothing if not stupid.

Posted by: therev1 | November 15, 2010 9:36 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company