November 10, 2022 • 40 mins
In May of 2001, 24 year-old Chandra Levy dissapeared while working an internship in Washington D.C. Her apparent affair with an older Congressman made the case a media sensation. But when her remains were found a year later, another suspect was arrested. So what happened to Chandra? Rasha and Yvette discuss the twists and turns of this very peculiar investigation.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
You're listening to Facing Evil, a production of iHeartRadio and
Tenderfoot TV. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast
are solely those of the individuals participating in the show
and do not represent those of iHeartRadio or Tenderfoot TV.
This podcast contains subject matter which may not be suitable
for everyone. Listener discretion is advised.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Hi everyone, welcome back to Facing Evil from Tenderfoot TV
and iHeartRadio. We are your host.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
I'm Yvette Gentiela.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
And I'm Roschia Paquerero, and as always, our fabulous producer,
mister Trevor Young is with us.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Hey there, Happy November.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
Happy No November. Trevor. I can't believe the years almost over.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
I know, I've had this on my mind for you know,
probably the last couple of weeks. You know, we talked about,
you know, Kenny Genove's right, a couple of weeks Togo,
and it just stuck with me, like how she kind
of got lost, you know, back then in that era,
because you know, they were so focused on the thirty
(01:11):
eight bystanders that we really lost focus of who Kitty
was and what her story was about, you know, And
today we're going to be talking about Schandra Levy and again,
you know, another young woman taken too soon, and again
the media loses focus because they they get so fixated
(01:34):
on you know, the Gary condit, the political candidate.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
The sensationalism of it all.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Right, I feel so proud, you know what we're doing
here on Facing Evil, because we really want to highlight
you know, who these women were, you know, at the
peak of their career, just about to get started, and
then something horrible happens to them, and again their story
(02:04):
gets lost.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Yeah, I mean, I think that's definitely a thing we
try and do on Facing Evil, right, is strip away
all the fluff and try and get down to the
stories of these victims, right, and talk about it from
an angle that maybe not everybody else talks about. Yes,
and that is the person, right that's getting to the
real empathy of any of these cases as talking about
(02:27):
the victims. So, you know, I think that's great and
I think this case today's probably a great example of.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
That, absolutely, Trevor.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
And with that being said, will you please take us
through today's case.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
The search is on in the district for a missing woman.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
Her name is Chandra Ann Levy. She is twenty four
years old and hasn't been seen since April thirtieth. Susan
Leevy came to our city with the mission she wanted
to know where her daughter was.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
What happened.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
A staffer for the congressman says there was no romantic
relationship between the congressman and miss Levy.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
Chandra Levy was a twenty four year old woman who
disappeared in May of two thousand and one. At the time,
she had just wrapped up an internship in Washington, d C.
And was getting ready to go back home to California.
But Chandra never made it home. On May sixth Chondra's
parents contacted DC police, saying they hadn't heard from her
(03:30):
in days, and so a search began, but they didn't
find her. Months later, her remains were discovered by a
hiker in Rock Creek Park. The story of Chondra Levy's
disappearance and death became a national obsession when it came
to light that Levy had a romantic relationship with a
married congressman leading up to her death. The investigation and
(03:52):
eventual prosecution were marred by ineptitude, and to this day,
it's unclear who killed Chondra Levy, and so who was
Schondra Levy? Who was actually responsible for her murder? And
what does this story tell us about how police handle
homicide investigations when a high profile politician is involved.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
So Russia, I remember that this was one of those
cases that was literally all over the media, and again,
people couldn't stop talking about it. And I remember living
in LA because this was in two thousand and one, right, yeah,
together with mom, and I remember being somewhat fixated on
(04:37):
it because you know, again we're talking about a young woman,
a young intern, right and going back years ago to
the Bill Clinton error with Monica Lewinsky. So I definitely
was captivated by this particular case.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
Yeah, I think we all were.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
And I remember, you know, her face on every magaz on,
every you know, news story, every headline, and Trevor, like
you said in the top of the episode, you know,
there was this young, smart, you know, student, just on
the cusp of what seemed like such a bright and
sparkling future, and she likely had this high profile affair
(05:20):
with this lawmaker, and people were talking about whether or
not that had been a cover up, if he was
involved somehow it, you know, I mean again, like you said,
you met Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton, Like, all these things
go through all of our heads, and I'll admit that's
I think why I was captivated at first.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, I do think that unlike the Bill
Clinton and Monica Lewinsky scandal, this case had a relatively
shorter lifespan. You know, there was definitely a period in
the media where this case was obsessed over because of
the you know, quote unquote scandalous relationship with a politician.
But you know, those leads connecting the politics to her
(06:00):
murder eventually did go try and it became very clear
that the authorities had just kind of botched this investigation.
And that is kind of when the public's attention started
looking away from it, it wasn't as interesting anymore, right,
And that's kind of a big tragedy in this case.
So I think there are many moments where the police
(06:21):
mishandled their job. They mishandled this investigation. They try and
pin it on someone else, and I think you can't
really like help, but wonder, like, had more of the
public eye state on them, would they have done a
better job? Right? Would this have gotten solved eventually? Right? True? True. True.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
I mean, you know, let's just begin with our classic question.
Who was Chandra Levy?
Speaker 4 (06:45):
Chandra Levy was twenty four years old. She was born
in Ohio, but the family moved to California, and actually
it was Modesto where she went to high school. She
ended up graduating from San Francisco State Universe with a
degree in journalism, and she briefly worked in the office
of the Los Angeles Mayor. She then enrolled in graduate
(07:07):
school at the University of Southern California for a master's
in public administration. In September of two thousand. She ended
up moving to Washington, d C. And it was there
that she worked as an intern with the Federal Bureau
of Prisons.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
And this is.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Where she met Gary Kandit Condent was a Democratic congressman
from California. He was also fifty two years old and married,
and he took a liking to Chandra.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
Yeah. I mean, obviously, this is something we see a lot, right,
is that older politicians men almost always, right, almost always
find themselves in a position of power where they can
potentially take advantage of a young intern. Right. You heard
about this a lot in the nineties and two thousand.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
Yes, that's right.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
And apparently on a visit Duram Thanksgiving, Chandra tells her
aunt that she's seen someone, but she refuses to name
any names. However, she did reportedly tell her aunt that
her boyfriend was in his fifties and he looked like
Harrison Ford, which he didn't.
Speaker 3 (08:17):
I'm just saying I.
Speaker 4 (08:18):
Think he did a little bit. I think he looked
a little bit like Harrison Ford.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
I mean, just because he's older, with salt and pepper hair. Yeah,
but she did reveal that her boyfriend was in fact
a congressman, So she's leaving a lot of hints, but
never said the name.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
Yeah, she never said the name specifically to anyone that
we know of, right right.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Anyway, the next month, over winter break, she emails a
friend and says, and this is her quote, my man
will be coming back here when Congress starts up again,
and I'm looking forward to seeing him again. She's not
naming it the names, She's not being specific, right, right.
(09:03):
So in January, Chandra tells her landlord that she won't
be renewing her lease because she'll be moving in with
her boyfriend. But by February she changed plans and tells
her landlord that it hadn't worked out.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Okay, so I guess that's that and the relationship was over. Anyway,
we do know that April twenty third is the last
day of Chandra's internship, and we also know that on
April twenty ninth, Gary Condit actually called Chandra, and on
the same day, Chondra called her Auntie in Marylyn and
left her a message saying she has quote some big news.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
Yeah, but we just don't know what was said on
that phone call, right.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
Nobody knows what the big news was, right, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
I mean I don't think we ever really do. We
do know she's set to go back to California for
her graduation from USC which is scheduled for May eleventh
that year, and in an April twenty eighth email to
her landlord, she wrote, quote, I'm moving back to California
for my graduation and I'm moving back there for good
end quote. And then on May first, she emailed her
(10:13):
parents with her travel plans, but again doesn't mention specific
times or how she'll be getting home. That email was
sent at ten forty five am Eastern time that day
May first, and that is actually the last known communication
from Chandra Levy, and we'll talk about what happened after
we take a quick break.
Speaker 4 (10:37):
Five days pass and Chandra Levy's parents haven't heard anything
from her, so of course they're getting worried.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
They end up calling the police. That's right, rash.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
And of course this is in the days before everyone
necessarily had a cell phone. And I'm thinking of her
traveling across the country right without the ability to get
in touch with her parents or you know, anybody whenever
she wanted. It just seems a bit strange, right. We
used to do things like that. I mean, I take
(11:09):
that back. We really didn't do things like that because
we always had a cell phone when the cell phones
came out. But the thing is, did Chondra actually have
a cell phone?
Speaker 3 (11:21):
Trevor, Do we know?
Speaker 1 (11:22):
Yeah? I mean, as you're alluding to, not everybody had
cell phones back then, but Chondra did have one that
we know of, and it is one of the items
that police find when they search her DC apartment after
she goes missing. So a couple other things they find.
They find two partially packed bags, a couple clothes. In
the closet, they find her running shoes, her driver's license,
(11:43):
a few other things like receipts and credit cards. However,
most notably, her apartment keys are missing.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Okay, so her keys were missing, but her driver's license,
her credit cards, and her cell phone were still in
the apartment, right, seems a bit off right. It feels
like if you're leaving the house, like you would definitely
take your driver's license at the very least. It just
makes you think, like, was she abducted from her apartment?
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (12:14):
Possibly?
Speaker 4 (12:15):
I mean, or you know, like we've been seeing this
entire time again in two thousand and one, not everyone
you know had a cell phone. They wouldn't necessarily carry
them everywhere that they went, of course, you know, you
and I did. It's but it's nothing like today, right,
so we are always attached to our phones. There's location
services on it, all the things. But she could have
(12:37):
left her apartment without all of those things.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Yeah, And I guess we'll never really know. And the
sad truth there is the reason for that is that
the police failed to obtain the surveillance camera footage from
the apartment building, even though it was in fact readily
available at least for a short period. So there was
a surveillance camera recording everyone who came and left the building.
Had police actually secured that footage, then presumably they could
(13:04):
have seen Chandra when she left the apartment and that
would have told them if she was with anyone, what
she was wearing, et cetera, et cetera. But they did
not secure that footage and it was recorded over after
a few days. So if you remember back then, any
sort of videotape recording, and this include security footage was
all analog. It was on you know, tapes, and so
(13:24):
they couldn't just digitally save it to the cloud, you know,
days and days worth of it. They would have to
re record over the tape, you know, every week or
month or whatever it is, to save on tape. So
because they didn't get it soon enough, they lost it
and therefore we don't know what happened when she left
the apartment.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Gosh, I mean, that's just like when you think about it,
it's just you know, failed police.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Work one oh one, you know.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
To secure the footage like that would be the first
thing you would want to see is you know, what
time did she leave the apartment and who possibly came
into the apartment, right.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
Yeah, I mean I guess there's maybe an excuse there
that CCTV and things of that sort were much newer
back in the nineties and early two thousands, right, I mean,
investigators maybe didn't have any uniform way to check for
that sort of thing at the time. But to me,
it's just incompetence, like if you know that exists, like
do something about it.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
So I think it's just the first of many things
we see in this case that is very disappointing, right.
Speaker 4 (14:26):
Yeah, very disappointing for sure. Okay, So around this time,
Chandra's mother calls Gary Condit herself and asks him for
help in finding Chandra. And it's during this call that
she also asks him if he was having an affair
with her daughter, and he says, quote unquote no. H.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
He also donates ten thousand dollars of his campaign money
towards the reward to find Chandra, and he releases a
news statement calling her, and this is a quote from him,
a great person and a good friend.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
Okay, So, whether or not he actually had an affair
with Chandra, I believe, in my humble opinion that this
is definitely Cyowa cover your own ass language for trying
to save his marriage if there was a relationship going
(15:25):
on more than just a friendship, and he's trying to
save his political career because you know, I mean, I'm
sure he saw what happened with Clinton and other people,
but I don't know. It just feels just feels fishy
to me.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
I totally agree with you, Russia. But there's more.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
The next month, in June, a Washington Post story is
published and according to the story, law enforcement sources say
that Chandra Levy spent the night at Condit's house. The
report doesn't say which night, and you know what. Condent's
office also denied any romantic involvement, and his lawyers demanded
(16:08):
a retraction, but the paper wouldn't retract it.
Speaker 3 (16:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (16:12):
I mean, I can see why the press is obsessed
with this scary content a fair angle.
Speaker 3 (16:18):
It's fishy again, fishy, fishy, fishy.
Speaker 4 (16:20):
I can see the obsession and why they were leaning
this way like that does not look good for him.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, I mean, going back again to the kind of
obsession that the media has with political scandals. You know,
anytime a young woman like this is killed, obviously that's horrible,
that's terrible. But when there's some sort of high profile
person involved. You can almost guarantee that's going to make
like front page news for days, weeks, even months. So
(16:46):
you know, Condit's in the spotlight here and he's kind
of thinking like, I have to, you know, play this right,
or it's going to ruin my career. And so during
this time Condit agrees to kind of play ball with
the investigators. So he submitted a DNA sample to police,
and then he takes and passes a light detector test.
Speaker 4 (17:05):
Well, that is very telling for sure. And meanwhile, the
result from search data on Schandra's laptop from a first
are finally revealed. They show that she used the Internet
until one pm that day and that she visited the
site for USA Today, the Drudge Report, and the Washington Post,
(17:26):
all of which you know you would expect considering what
she was interested in. But it also reveals a map
quest search for a place called Klingle Mansion in Rock
Creek Park. So Rock Creek Park is Washington, DC's big
urban park, and Klingle Mansion is apparently this historic house
from the eighteen hundreds which is located in a very
(17:48):
secluded part of the park, and at that time, in
two thousand and one, the trail to get to Klingle
Mansion was actually closed, so you'd have to know your
way around to know where it was and that it
was even there or how to find it.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
So maybe that's where she went, right without her cell phone.
I mean, maybe she went on a run. Right, it's
a trail, it's like an offbeaten trail, So possibly she
was just going for a run, didn't take her things.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Yeah, possibly, possibly.
Speaker 4 (18:21):
You know, police end up searching the park, but not
until after nearly a full month after they saw this
search data from her computer. So they searched the park
on July sixteenth, and these are United States Park Police
on horseback. They're joined by Police Academy cadets, and throughout
their search they end up finding zilch nothing. So months
(18:45):
end up going by. July becomes August, August becomes September,
and then I think a huge factor in the Chandra
Leeby case is September eleventh, two thousand and one happened
to the United States, And I think that is exactly when, sadly,
(19:07):
the public's obsession with Shondra Levy went away. The whole
world was fixated on this horrible, tragic event and Chandra
got lost in the shuffle.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
Yeah, and not just the public, by the way, but
you know, law enforcement we're now on high alert and
directing all of their attention to anything that might be considered,
you know, a terrorist or international threat, right right, And
so it's really not until the following year that there's
any movement on this case whatsoever. So on May twenty
second of two thousand and two, a man is at
(19:44):
walking his dog in Rock Creek Park when he noticed
that his dog is very intensely sniffing this little spot
on the side of a bluff. So he goes up
to the spot where his dog is scratching and digging,
and he starts rubbing the dirt way and that is
when he discovers a human skull in the ground.
Speaker 4 (20:05):
Yeah, it's well, I can't even imagine what he was thinking.
He ends up calling the police, and investigators quickly found
other bones in the area, and they also found a
jogging bra, panties, tennis shoes, sweatpants, and a walkman or
(20:25):
a portable radio for those of you who don't know
what a walkman is, And sadly, dental records end up
confirming that it is indeed Chandra Levy's remains. So, Trevor,
why did it take this long for them to find Chandra?
Speaker 1 (20:42):
Yeah, I mean that's a big question in this case,
right Yeah. Yeah, Like supposedly they searched the park pretty well,
but you know, at the end of the day, they
found nothing, and it's just kind of a random stranger
who happens to stumble upon this with his dog. You know,
I wonder if they used any canine units and searching
the park. I mean, clearly a dog would have been
(21:05):
able to smell even fresher remains a year earlier, but
you know, who knows. So it sounds like they just
didn't do a very good job of searching, right Like
it was right there in the woods.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
It was right there, and you know, I just have
to say, like, to me, it just seems like common sense,
right because it seems like they're just searching the roads,
but in fact there are you know, trails where people
are running on these off trails, and why they didn't
go a little further to these trails just baffles me
(21:41):
because it was right there.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Yeah. I mean, they'll probably tell you as a resource thing, right,
like they could only dispatch a certain number of men
for a certain period of time before they had to
call off their search and move on to something else. Right,
That's a very common answer you hear from law enforcement,
and it's an unfortunate reality and why a lot of
cases don't get solved the way they should. So, you know,
who knows. But the reality is is that had they
(22:05):
discovered her sooner, they would have gotten a lot more
forensic evidence that they could have used when investigating her case.
You know, they might have been able to determine if
she had been raped, if there was any blood semen,
you know, anything under her fingernails that they could have
used as DNA evidence. But you know, at the end
of the day, all they really got was a few bones,
(22:26):
some clothing. All of this has been weathered away by
months and months and months of erosion and you know,
decay and all these things. Yeah, so they don't really
have a lot. I guess the only thing we really
do get is that we now know that Chandra Levy
is in fact dead, and that at least provides a
little bit of closure for the family.
Speaker 4 (22:46):
Yeah, yeah, I mean you do have to feel thankful
for that, at least for her her mother and her
father and her family they can now finally, you know,
bury their little girl.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
You know.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
But that's not the end of the sty This is
where things get kind of weird for me, you know.
I mean, it's just a few months later after they
found Chandra's remains that a five time felon and a
former gang member ends up coming forward to tell authorities
that he actually knows who Chandra's killer is.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Yes, and we will learn about who that five time
felon is after we take a quick break.
Speaker 4 (23:31):
So, just a few months after Chandra's remains were found
in September of two thousand and two, an incarcerated man
named Armando Morales ended up coming forward. So Armando said
that his cellmate, Ingmar Guandique, had confessed to him that
he'd killed Chandra Levy.
Speaker 1 (23:51):
Yeah, so here's just a little pull from the Washington
Post article that reported this quote. Guandique had been walking
in the Adams Morgan neighborhood when a car pulled through
the curb. He claims Condit offered him money twenty five
thousand dollars to kill a woman. So what Morales's testimony
(24:11):
is suggesting here is that Gary Condit is involved and
somehow responsible for the murder of Chandra Levi by having
hired an assassin. So Morales said, quote, the congressman provided
Guandik with Chandra Levy's picture and a location where he
could find her.
Speaker 2 (24:31):
So he claims that Guandik was just out for a
stroll one day when all of a sudden, Gary condit
stops him just randomly, right and offers him twenty five
thousand dollars to murder his intern Is that what you're saying?
Speaker 1 (24:50):
Yeah, I mean it leaves a lot up to chance. Right,
he just happened to stumble upon somebody who is willing
to kill somebody for a twenty five grand right?
Speaker 3 (24:59):
Yeah? Did he look like a killer?
Speaker 4 (25:01):
Like?
Speaker 1 (25:01):
What's that? Like?
Speaker 2 (25:02):
I don't even that doesn't make any sense. I mean
he's just, you know, randomly driving through the streets of
DC looking for someone who looks like they.
Speaker 4 (25:09):
Look like a killer and that they take money to
kill her. Yeah, that's super far fetched. I just have
to say, hmmmm, I don't buy it.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Yeah, And the more you read into it, the more
weird it becomes. So I'll read the rest of the
quote here. The informant said, guandi K told him he
took drugs and drank alcohol to steel himself for the attack.
He went to the location cond it gave him and
saw Chandra running on a path. Guandik hid in the bushes,
and when Chondra circled back, he jumped out and attacked her,
(25:40):
stabbing her in the neck and the stomach. She fell
to the ground and Guandik carried her body far into
the woods. He dug a hole with his hands and
covered Schondra with dirt, leaves and sticks. He left the
knife in her body and later considered retrieving it, but
never did. He sent the twenty five thousand dollars to
his family in El Salvador quote.
Speaker 4 (26:01):
So, according to Morality's account, there should have been a
knife found at the scene, and was a knife ever found?
Speaker 1 (26:10):
Trevor, No, Yeah, there was no knife. So I mean,
this is making all of what Morales is saying here
to be really fishy. So what happens then is that
Morales agreed to tell this story on the witness stand
in return for better conditions in prison. And I think
that's when the full picture of what's probably really going
on here comes into view, right.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
Yeah, totally, But do we know who Guandique is like,
is this the guy that killed Chandra Levy? I mean,
I don't think we're sold on that, or are we
I'm not quite yet.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
Yeah. I mean we know that he's an immigrant from
El Salvador, we know he doesn't speak English. That summer,
he had actually been arrested earlier for attacking to women
in Rock Creek Park. So all of this is going
on in two thousand and two, the year after Chandra
Lee he was killed, and Guandi Ku went on to
be sentenced to ten years for said crimes, but he
(27:06):
did deny killing Schandra Levy and there was still no
physical evidence connecting him to the murder. So there was
a bit of a pattern here that maybe connected him,
but that's entirely circumstantial.
Speaker 3 (27:16):
In the same part the year after she was killed.
Speaker 1 (27:19):
Sure, I mean, I see how you can maybe draw
those conclusions or how that might set him up to
look guilty, but again, no physical evidence. That knife was
never found, right right right?
Speaker 2 (27:33):
I got another question though, what about I wonder if
they ever traced to see if there was ever any
money exchange, Like was the twenty five thousand dollars ever
sent to his family?
Speaker 1 (27:44):
Yeah? I mean the other thing you can check is
whether or not Gary Condit, you withdrew any large sums
of money close to twenty five grand on the days
leading up to her murder, which would also you know,
back that account up. I don't think that looked into that.
If they did, I don't know about it. Well. So
then in two thousand and nine, a new DC Police
(28:06):
chief decided to reopen the case, and investigators in DC
Police announce that they are charging Guandi Kay for the
assault and murder of Chandra Levy. So his trial begins
in October of two thousand and nine. The two women
Guandique was convicted of attacking in the park both testify
at this time, and they describe how he attacked them
(28:26):
as they jogged alone in the park, so sounding a
little familiar perhaps same emo. One woman says he dragged
her down a ravine and attacked her with a knife.
Chandra Levi's father also takes the stand and says he
believes Gary Khannit is still the most likely suspect, and
he reveals that Chandra and Condit had concocted a quote
(28:47):
five year plan prior to her death, in which he
would divorce his current wife and Mary Chandra. So it
sounds like maybe they were planning on running away together
and maybe something went wrong, at least according to the.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
Father, right right, right.
Speaker 1 (29:00):
So then a condut himself takes the stand and testifies,
and when asked whether he and Chondra had a sexual relationship,
he refused to answer flat out, and he said he
did this out of respect for Chandra. So an FBI
biologist also revealed that semen found on a pair of
Sandra's underwear match that of condits found in her apartment.
Speaker 2 (29:22):
That is so fishy and I just I just have
to throw my two cents in here, like he in
that he says out of respect for Chandra. No respect
for Chandra would be telling the truth by saying, yes,
we had a sexual relationship, that is respect.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Yeah. Yeah, we know he's full of shit.
Speaker 4 (29:42):
Yeah, he'd been married since I think nineteen sixty seven,
so he was trying to save everything from burning down.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
I think that.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
Said, I mean, regardless of whether or not he was
having an affair, which it sounds like he was, right,
he doesn't necessarily mean he killed her. I mean the
fact that they find semen on the panties in her
apartment suggests they were having a sexual relationship, and frankly,
nothing more, right, I mean, the fact that they were
having an affair near the time that she was killed
is certainly suspicious and fishy, but that's not physical evidence
(30:13):
tying him to her murder, right.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
Right, It is a potential motive, but it's not.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Yeah, yeah, potentially. So Anyways, the jury finds guandi Ka
guilty of two counts of first degree murder, so a
juror later claimed that their decision was mostly based on
Morales's testimony that he gave, and guandi k was then
sentenced to sixty years in prison.
Speaker 4 (30:36):
I watched a show about Chandra Levy this past week.
I believe it was on Oxygen, and they interviewed Chandra's
mom and dad, and when that verdict came down, you know,
like they had to have an interpreter for guandi Kie
because again he didn't speak English, and they asked him
if he killed you know, Schandra Levy, And you know,
(30:59):
they were saying in this documentary that they didn't even
need an interpreter because he was like, I am he
said it in Spanish, but he's like, I'm something along
the lines of I'm so sorry for your loss, But
I did not kill Schandra Levy. And like mom, dad,
you know, like they had they stated in this documentary
that they had doubt. And it's just I don't even
(31:23):
know how they convicted him on his cellmate's testimony when
there's no other evidence. But you know, Gwandique ends up
writing a letter to a reporter at the Washington Post
after that verdict, and after he said all that in
the courtroom, he says, of course that everything was false,
the evidence presented by the government and Monals his testimony
(31:44):
was false, and of course his attorney files on appeal
and in May twenty fifteen, prosecutors agreed to hold a
new trial after the defense argued that informant Morales had
perjured himself on the stand.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Dang, and this is two thousand and fifty, this is
now a full fourteen years after Chandra Levy was murdered.
Speaker 1 (32:06):
Yeah, I mean, wrongful conviction puts people in prison for
decades and decades sometimes, you know, that said he was
convicted of probably rightfully attacking other women for which he
should have been in prison, So you know, maybe he
was going to be there anyways, but you know, at
least in this case, it seems like, at least from
my perspective, Guandi Kay is correct in the fact that
(32:28):
all of this was false and that he was not
actually guilty of murdering Chandra Levy. So there's a pretty
good quote from the AP that sums us all up
that I'll read very quickly. Quote. Authorities acknowledged that they
had no DNA evidence or witnesses linking gue d Ka
to the crime, building their prosecution instead around a jail
house informant who said Guandika had confessed behind bars that
(32:50):
he was responsible for Levi's death. They also said the
attack on Levy fit a pattern of assaults by Guandi
Kay on other female joggers in the same where she
went missing and during the same timeframe. So Guandique, who
was already in prison for those attacks when he was
accused in Levy's death in two thousand and nine, professed
innocence at his sentencing hearing. His lawyers said police and
(33:14):
prosecutors made him escapegoat for a botched investigation. And I
do think that sums up what we know about this
investigation so far.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
Absolutely what a freaking miss hot mess.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
Yeah, So what this appears to be then is that
Morale is the person who gave this testimony, was looking
for a lighter sentence and saw an opportunity to rat
out somebody else to get that. And then some things
happened that back this up. So when prosecutors and the
judge agreed to hold a new trial, it comes to
(33:47):
light that Armando Morales had actually testified in federal cases before,
and that the prosecution knew this but failed to disclose it.
The defense argued that this misconduct warranted the charges against
Guandigae be completely dropped. So this is something he had
been doing frequently along with investigators, to nail people who
(34:09):
may not have been responsible so that they could close
their cases and Morales could get shorter sentences.
Speaker 4 (34:15):
Pooh, yeah, well it's horrible, totally horrible, And you know, meanwhile,
and this is this is a little crazy. But Armando
Morales's neighbor ends up coming forward and she's made a
bunch of secret recordings of her conversations with Morales in
which he talked about being the key witness in the
(34:36):
Chandra Levy case and flat out says that he lied
about Guandique's confession to improve his prison conditions, just like
you said, Trevor, And so in light of you know
this development, all charges against Guandique are indeed dropped again
no physical evidence against him, and without the testimony of Morales,
(34:59):
they have not nothing.
Speaker 3 (35:01):
So basically they're back to square one, sadly.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Yeah, yeah, And where the story essentially ends is that
in May of twenty seventeen, Guandi Ku was deported back
to El Salvador. Gary Condit's career was essentially destroyed by this.
As you would imagine, he was voted out of office
in two thousand and two, very likely from all the
negative press he was receiving. He then moved to Phoenix,
(35:24):
where he and his wife attempted and failed at a
couple of Baskin Robbins franchises that they briefly owned. And
so yeah, nobody walked away from this unscathed.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
Yeah yeah, And I you know, again, the sad thing
about all this is like we still don't know who
the real murderer is, Like we still.
Speaker 3 (35:44):
Have no clue.
Speaker 1 (35:46):
Yeah, I mean again, because police were so hyper fixated
on Gary Condit's involvement and the testimony, the false testimony
that they had from Morales, right that they really failed
to dedicate the time and resources to looking at a
wise range of suspects and looking at all of the
evidence in front of them. And so now it's years
(36:07):
decades later almost, and you know, we have nothing really
left to work with. There's essentially no way to solve
this space on where we're at now, right.
Speaker 3 (36:15):
And that's what I think so tragic, right.
Speaker 4 (36:18):
And you know, when I was listening to Chandra's mom
and dad speak in that Oxygen documentary, her mom said,
she's like, you know, even if we find out who
killed my daughter, it's not going to bring her back.
And that was like, oh, like, it just broke my
(36:38):
heart even more, you know. And I will say one
thing with like Gary Condent being, you know, such a
big headline, and this is something her mom, you know,
chimed in about as well. She doesn't think that she
would have gotten as much media coverage if her daughter
hadn't been involved with him, because it was such a
sensationalized media story that you know, she was going, her
(37:01):
and her husband were going on different news programs to
talk about their missing daughter because she hadn't been found
for that entire year.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
But through all of that.
Speaker 4 (37:09):
And with nine to eleven happening. You know, we no
one really got to see who Chandra Levy was as
a human being. She was more of just a headline.
And that's what's so heartbreaking.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
Absolutely I think what you said is absolutely true, you know,
And what we have to remember is that, you know,
she was more than a headline. She was a human
being just at the start of her life.
Speaker 4 (37:40):
So that brings us to this week's emua, our final
message of hope and healing. Our EMUA goes to Chandra Levy.
If those in charge of finding justice for her murder
had paid more attention to Chandra's actual actions in the
final hours of her life, then maybe her family might
have some measure of justice today. Instead, the police and
(38:04):
the justice system focused on innuendo, scandal headlines, and when
all of that failed, they ended up finding a scapegoat
on which to pin her.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Death, and few bothered to know her in the weeks
and months when doing so might have made a difference.
And so we'll take a moment now to honor her life.
Chandra Ann Levy was more than the worst thing that
ever happened to her. She was a fun, loving and
playful sister. She was prone to being an occasional big
(38:38):
sister BOSSI. She played Little League and she loved the
San Francisco Giants. And she was a bright, brilliant young woman,
you know, doing her thing working in DC.
Speaker 4 (38:56):
Yes, and she was an individual who didn't like being
told what to do. She was a very independent and
vibrant young woman with a bright future that should have
been hers to claim today and always we honor you, Chandra,
Onward and upward, Emua, emua.
Speaker 3 (39:22):
Well, that is our show for today.
Speaker 2 (39:24):
We'd love to hear what you thought about today's discussion
and if there was a case that you'd like us
to cover, please find us on social media or email
us at facinevil pod at tenderfoot dot tv.
Speaker 4 (39:38):
And one request, if you haven't already, please find us
on iTunes and give us a good review and a
good rating. If you like what we do, your support
is always cherished.
Speaker 2 (39:48):
Until next time, ah Looha.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
Facing Evil is a production of iHeartRadio and Tenderfoot TV.
The show is hosted by Russia Peccuerero and Avet Gentile.
Matt Frederick and Alex Williams our executive producers on behalf
of iHeartRadio, with producers Trevor Young, and Jesse Funk, Donald
Albright in Payne Lindsay our executive producers on behalf of
(40:26):
Tenderfoot TV, alongside producer Tracy Kaplan. Our researcher is Claudia Dafrico.
Original music by Makeup and Vanity Set. Find us on
social media or email us at facingevilpod at tenderfoot dot tv.
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio or Tenderfoot TV, visit the
iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your
(40:50):
favorite shows
You're listening to Facing Evil, a production of iHeartRadio and
Tenderfoot TV. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast
are solely those of the individuals participating in the show
and do not represent those of iHeartRadio or Tenderfoot TV.
This podcast contains subject matter which may not be suitable
for everyone. Listener discretion is advised.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Hi everyone, welcome back to Facing Evil from Tenderfoot TV
and iHeartRadio. We are your host.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
I'm Yvette Gentiela.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
And I'm Roschia Paquerero, and as always, our fabulous producer,
mister Trevor Young is with us.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Hey there, Happy November.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
Happy No November. Trevor. I can't believe the years almost over.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
I know, I've had this on my mind for you know,
probably the last couple of weeks. You know, we talked about,
you know, Kenny Genove's right, a couple of weeks Togo,
and it just stuck with me, like how she kind
of got lost, you know, back then in that era,
because you know, they were so focused on the thirty
(01:11):
eight bystanders that we really lost focus of who Kitty
was and what her story was about, you know, And
today we're going to be talking about Schandra Levy and again,
you know, another young woman taken too soon, and again
the media loses focus because they they get so fixated
(01:34):
on you know, the Gary condit, the political candidate.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
The sensationalism of it all.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Right, I feel so proud, you know what we're doing
here on Facing Evil, because we really want to highlight
you know, who these women were, you know, at the
peak of their career, just about to get started, and
then something horrible happens to them, and again their story
(02:04):
gets lost.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Yeah, I mean, I think that's definitely a thing we
try and do on Facing Evil, right, is strip away
all the fluff and try and get down to the
stories of these victims, right, and talk about it from
an angle that maybe not everybody else talks about. Yes,
and that is the person, right that's getting to the
real empathy of any of these cases as talking about
(02:27):
the victims. So, you know, I think that's great and
I think this case today's probably a great example of.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
That, absolutely, Trevor.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
And with that being said, will you please take us
through today's case.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
The search is on in the district for a missing woman.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
Her name is Chandra Ann Levy. She is twenty four
years old and hasn't been seen since April thirtieth. Susan
Leevy came to our city with the mission she wanted
to know where her daughter was.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
What happened.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
A staffer for the congressman says there was no romantic
relationship between the congressman and miss Levy.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
Chandra Levy was a twenty four year old woman who
disappeared in May of two thousand and one. At the time,
she had just wrapped up an internship in Washington, d C.
And was getting ready to go back home to California.
But Chandra never made it home. On May sixth Chondra's
parents contacted DC police, saying they hadn't heard from her
(03:30):
in days, and so a search began, but they didn't
find her. Months later, her remains were discovered by a
hiker in Rock Creek Park. The story of Chondra Levy's
disappearance and death became a national obsession when it came
to light that Levy had a romantic relationship with a
married congressman leading up to her death. The investigation and
(03:52):
eventual prosecution were marred by ineptitude, and to this day,
it's unclear who killed Chondra Levy, and so who was
Schondra Levy? Who was actually responsible for her murder? And
what does this story tell us about how police handle
homicide investigations when a high profile politician is involved.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
So Russia, I remember that this was one of those
cases that was literally all over the media, and again,
people couldn't stop talking about it. And I remember living
in LA because this was in two thousand and one, right, yeah,
together with mom, and I remember being somewhat fixated on
(04:37):
it because you know, again we're talking about a young woman,
a young intern, right and going back years ago to
the Bill Clinton error with Monica Lewinsky. So I definitely
was captivated by this particular case.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
Yeah, I think we all were.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
And I remember, you know, her face on every magaz on,
every you know, news story, every headline, and Trevor, like
you said in the top of the episode, you know,
there was this young, smart, you know, student, just on
the cusp of what seemed like such a bright and
sparkling future, and she likely had this high profile affair
(05:20):
with this lawmaker, and people were talking about whether or
not that had been a cover up, if he was
involved somehow it, you know, I mean again, like you said,
you met Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton, Like, all these things
go through all of our heads, and I'll admit that's
I think why I was captivated at first.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, I do think that unlike the Bill
Clinton and Monica Lewinsky scandal, this case had a relatively
shorter lifespan. You know, there was definitely a period in
the media where this case was obsessed over because of
the you know, quote unquote scandalous relationship with a politician.
But you know, those leads connecting the politics to her
(06:00):
murder eventually did go try and it became very clear
that the authorities had just kind of botched this investigation.
And that is kind of when the public's attention started
looking away from it, it wasn't as interesting anymore, right,
And that's kind of a big tragedy in this case.
So I think there are many moments where the police
(06:21):
mishandled their job. They mishandled this investigation. They try and
pin it on someone else, and I think you can't
really like help, but wonder, like, had more of the
public eye state on them, would they have done a
better job? Right? Would this have gotten solved eventually? Right? True? True. True.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
I mean, you know, let's just begin with our classic question.
Who was Chandra Levy?
Speaker 4 (06:45):
Chandra Levy was twenty four years old. She was born
in Ohio, but the family moved to California, and actually
it was Modesto where she went to high school. She
ended up graduating from San Francisco State Universe with a
degree in journalism, and she briefly worked in the office
of the Los Angeles Mayor. She then enrolled in graduate
(07:07):
school at the University of Southern California for a master's
in public administration. In September of two thousand. She ended
up moving to Washington, d C. And it was there
that she worked as an intern with the Federal Bureau
of Prisons.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
And this is.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Where she met Gary Kandit Condent was a Democratic congressman
from California. He was also fifty two years old and married,
and he took a liking to Chandra.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
Yeah. I mean, obviously, this is something we see a lot, right,
is that older politicians men almost always, right, almost always
find themselves in a position of power where they can
potentially take advantage of a young intern. Right. You heard
about this a lot in the nineties and two thousand.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
Yes, that's right.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
And apparently on a visit Duram Thanksgiving, Chandra tells her
aunt that she's seen someone, but she refuses to name
any names. However, she did reportedly tell her aunt that
her boyfriend was in his fifties and he looked like
Harrison Ford, which he didn't.
Speaker 3 (08:17):
I'm just saying I.
Speaker 4 (08:18):
Think he did a little bit. I think he looked
a little bit like Harrison Ford.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
I mean, just because he's older, with salt and pepper hair. Yeah,
but she did reveal that her boyfriend was in fact
a congressman, So she's leaving a lot of hints, but
never said the name.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
Yeah, she never said the name specifically to anyone that
we know of, right right.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Anyway, the next month, over winter break, she emails a
friend and says, and this is her quote, my man
will be coming back here when Congress starts up again,
and I'm looking forward to seeing him again. She's not
naming it the names, She's not being specific, right, right.
(09:03):
So in January, Chandra tells her landlord that she won't
be renewing her lease because she'll be moving in with
her boyfriend. But by February she changed plans and tells
her landlord that it hadn't worked out.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Okay, so I guess that's that and the relationship was over. Anyway,
we do know that April twenty third is the last
day of Chandra's internship, and we also know that on
April twenty ninth, Gary Condit actually called Chandra, and on
the same day, Chondra called her Auntie in Marylyn and
left her a message saying she has quote some big news.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
Yeah, but we just don't know what was said on
that phone call, right.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
Nobody knows what the big news was, right, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
I mean I don't think we ever really do. We
do know she's set to go back to California for
her graduation from USC which is scheduled for May eleventh
that year, and in an April twenty eighth email to
her landlord, she wrote, quote, I'm moving back to California
for my graduation and I'm moving back there for good
end quote. And then on May first, she emailed her
(10:13):
parents with her travel plans, but again doesn't mention specific
times or how she'll be getting home. That email was
sent at ten forty five am Eastern time that day
May first, and that is actually the last known communication
from Chandra Levy, and we'll talk about what happened after
we take a quick break.
Speaker 4 (10:37):
Five days pass and Chandra Levy's parents haven't heard anything
from her, so of course they're getting worried.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
They end up calling the police. That's right, rash.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
And of course this is in the days before everyone
necessarily had a cell phone. And I'm thinking of her
traveling across the country right without the ability to get
in touch with her parents or you know, anybody whenever
she wanted. It just seems a bit strange, right. We
used to do things like that. I mean, I take
(11:09):
that back. We really didn't do things like that because
we always had a cell phone when the cell phones
came out. But the thing is, did Chondra actually have
a cell phone?
Speaker 3 (11:21):
Trevor, Do we know?
Speaker 1 (11:22):
Yeah? I mean, as you're alluding to, not everybody had
cell phones back then, but Chondra did have one that
we know of, and it is one of the items
that police find when they search her DC apartment after
she goes missing. So a couple other things they find.
They find two partially packed bags, a couple clothes. In
the closet, they find her running shoes, her driver's license,
(11:43):
a few other things like receipts and credit cards. However,
most notably, her apartment keys are missing.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Okay, so her keys were missing, but her driver's license,
her credit cards, and her cell phone were still in
the apartment, right, seems a bit off right. It feels
like if you're leaving the house, like you would definitely
take your driver's license at the very least. It just
makes you think, like, was she abducted from her apartment?
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (12:14):
Possibly?
Speaker 4 (12:15):
I mean, or you know, like we've been seeing this
entire time again in two thousand and one, not everyone
you know had a cell phone. They wouldn't necessarily carry
them everywhere that they went, of course, you know, you
and I did. It's but it's nothing like today, right,
so we are always attached to our phones. There's location
services on it, all the things. But she could have
(12:37):
left her apartment without all of those things.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Yeah, And I guess we'll never really know. And the
sad truth there is the reason for that is that
the police failed to obtain the surveillance camera footage from
the apartment building, even though it was in fact readily
available at least for a short period. So there was
a surveillance camera recording everyone who came and left the building.
Had police actually secured that footage, then presumably they could
(13:04):
have seen Chandra when she left the apartment and that
would have told them if she was with anyone, what
she was wearing, et cetera, et cetera. But they did
not secure that footage and it was recorded over after
a few days. So if you remember back then, any
sort of videotape recording, and this include security footage was
all analog. It was on you know, tapes, and so
(13:24):
they couldn't just digitally save it to the cloud, you know,
days and days worth of it. They would have to
re record over the tape, you know, every week or
month or whatever it is, to save on tape. So
because they didn't get it soon enough, they lost it
and therefore we don't know what happened when she left
the apartment.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Gosh, I mean, that's just like when you think about it,
it's just you know, failed police.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Work one oh one, you know.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
To secure the footage like that would be the first
thing you would want to see is you know, what
time did she leave the apartment and who possibly came
into the apartment, right.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
Yeah, I mean I guess there's maybe an excuse there
that CCTV and things of that sort were much newer
back in the nineties and early two thousands, right, I mean,
investigators maybe didn't have any uniform way to check for
that sort of thing at the time. But to me,
it's just incompetence, like if you know that exists, like
do something about it.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
So I think it's just the first of many things
we see in this case that is very disappointing, right.
Speaker 4 (14:26):
Yeah, very disappointing for sure. Okay, So around this time,
Chandra's mother calls Gary Condit herself and asks him for
help in finding Chandra. And it's during this call that
she also asks him if he was having an affair
with her daughter, and he says, quote unquote no. H.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
He also donates ten thousand dollars of his campaign money
towards the reward to find Chandra, and he releases a
news statement calling her, and this is a quote from him,
a great person and a good friend.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
Okay, So, whether or not he actually had an affair
with Chandra, I believe, in my humble opinion that this
is definitely Cyowa cover your own ass language for trying
to save his marriage if there was a relationship going
(15:25):
on more than just a friendship, and he's trying to
save his political career because you know, I mean, I'm
sure he saw what happened with Clinton and other people,
but I don't know. It just feels just feels fishy
to me.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
I totally agree with you, Russia. But there's more.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
The next month, in June, a Washington Post story is
published and according to the story, law enforcement sources say
that Chandra Levy spent the night at Condit's house. The
report doesn't say which night, and you know what. Condent's
office also denied any romantic involvement, and his lawyers demanded
(16:08):
a retraction, but the paper wouldn't retract it.
Speaker 3 (16:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (16:12):
I mean, I can see why the press is obsessed
with this scary content a fair angle.
Speaker 3 (16:18):
It's fishy again, fishy, fishy, fishy.
Speaker 4 (16:20):
I can see the obsession and why they were leaning
this way like that does not look good for him.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, I mean, going back again to the kind of
obsession that the media has with political scandals. You know,
anytime a young woman like this is killed, obviously that's horrible,
that's terrible. But when there's some sort of high profile
person involved. You can almost guarantee that's going to make
like front page news for days, weeks, even months. So
(16:46):
you know, Condit's in the spotlight here and he's kind
of thinking like, I have to, you know, play this right,
or it's going to ruin my career. And so during
this time Condit agrees to kind of play ball with
the investigators. So he submitted a DNA sample to police,
and then he takes and passes a light detector test.
Speaker 4 (17:05):
Well, that is very telling for sure. And meanwhile, the
result from search data on Schandra's laptop from a first
are finally revealed. They show that she used the Internet
until one pm that day and that she visited the
site for USA Today, the Drudge Report, and the Washington Post,
(17:26):
all of which you know you would expect considering what
she was interested in. But it also reveals a map
quest search for a place called Klingle Mansion in Rock
Creek Park. So Rock Creek Park is Washington, DC's big
urban park, and Klingle Mansion is apparently this historic house
from the eighteen hundreds which is located in a very
(17:48):
secluded part of the park, and at that time, in
two thousand and one, the trail to get to Klingle
Mansion was actually closed, so you'd have to know your
way around to know where it was and that it
was even there or how to find it.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
So maybe that's where she went, right without her cell phone.
I mean, maybe she went on a run. Right, it's
a trail, it's like an offbeaten trail, So possibly she
was just going for a run, didn't take her things.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Yeah, possibly, possibly.
Speaker 4 (18:21):
You know, police end up searching the park, but not
until after nearly a full month after they saw this
search data from her computer. So they searched the park
on July sixteenth, and these are United States Park Police
on horseback. They're joined by Police Academy cadets, and throughout
their search they end up finding zilch nothing. So months
(18:45):
end up going by. July becomes August, August becomes September,
and then I think a huge factor in the Chandra
Leeby case is September eleventh, two thousand and one happened
to the United States, And I think that is exactly when, sadly,
(19:07):
the public's obsession with Shondra Levy went away. The whole
world was fixated on this horrible, tragic event and Chandra
got lost in the shuffle.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
Yeah, and not just the public, by the way, but
you know, law enforcement we're now on high alert and
directing all of their attention to anything that might be considered,
you know, a terrorist or international threat, right right, And
so it's really not until the following year that there's
any movement on this case whatsoever. So on May twenty
second of two thousand and two, a man is at
(19:44):
walking his dog in Rock Creek Park when he noticed
that his dog is very intensely sniffing this little spot
on the side of a bluff. So he goes up
to the spot where his dog is scratching and digging,
and he starts rubbing the dirt way and that is
when he discovers a human skull in the ground.
Speaker 4 (20:05):
Yeah, it's well, I can't even imagine what he was thinking.
He ends up calling the police, and investigators quickly found
other bones in the area, and they also found a
jogging bra, panties, tennis shoes, sweatpants, and a walkman or
(20:25):
a portable radio for those of you who don't know
what a walkman is, And sadly, dental records end up
confirming that it is indeed Chandra Levy's remains. So, Trevor,
why did it take this long for them to find Chandra?
Speaker 1 (20:42):
Yeah, I mean that's a big question in this case,
right Yeah. Yeah, Like supposedly they searched the park pretty well,
but you know, at the end of the day, they
found nothing, and it's just kind of a random stranger
who happens to stumble upon this with his dog. You know,
I wonder if they used any canine units and searching
the park. I mean, clearly a dog would have been
(21:05):
able to smell even fresher remains a year earlier, but
you know, who knows. So it sounds like they just
didn't do a very good job of searching, right Like
it was right there in the woods.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
It was right there, and you know, I just have
to say, like, to me, it just seems like common sense,
right because it seems like they're just searching the roads,
but in fact there are you know, trails where people
are running on these off trails, and why they didn't
go a little further to these trails just baffles me
(21:41):
because it was right there.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Yeah. I mean, they'll probably tell you as a resource thing, right,
like they could only dispatch a certain number of men
for a certain period of time before they had to
call off their search and move on to something else. Right,
That's a very common answer you hear from law enforcement,
and it's an unfortunate reality and why a lot of
cases don't get solved the way they should. So, you know,
who knows. But the reality is is that had they
(22:05):
discovered her sooner, they would have gotten a lot more
forensic evidence that they could have used when investigating her case.
You know, they might have been able to determine if
she had been raped, if there was any blood semen,
you know, anything under her fingernails that they could have
used as DNA evidence. But you know, at the end
of the day, all they really got was a few bones,
(22:26):
some clothing. All of this has been weathered away by
months and months and months of erosion and you know,
decay and all these things. Yeah, so they don't really
have a lot. I guess the only thing we really
do get is that we now know that Chandra Levy
is in fact dead, and that at least provides a
little bit of closure for the family.
Speaker 4 (22:46):
Yeah, yeah, I mean you do have to feel thankful
for that, at least for her her mother and her
father and her family they can now finally, you know,
bury their little girl.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
You know.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
But that's not the end of the sty This is
where things get kind of weird for me, you know.
I mean, it's just a few months later after they
found Chandra's remains that a five time felon and a
former gang member ends up coming forward to tell authorities
that he actually knows who Chandra's killer is.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Yes, and we will learn about who that five time
felon is after we take a quick break.
Speaker 4 (23:31):
So, just a few months after Chandra's remains were found
in September of two thousand and two, an incarcerated man
named Armando Morales ended up coming forward. So Armando said
that his cellmate, Ingmar Guandique, had confessed to him that
he'd killed Chandra Levy.
Speaker 1 (23:51):
Yeah, so here's just a little pull from the Washington
Post article that reported this quote. Guandique had been walking
in the Adams Morgan neighborhood when a car pulled through
the curb. He claims Condit offered him money twenty five
thousand dollars to kill a woman. So what Morales's testimony
(24:11):
is suggesting here is that Gary Condit is involved and
somehow responsible for the murder of Chandra Levi by having
hired an assassin. So Morales said, quote, the congressman provided
Guandik with Chandra Levy's picture and a location where he
could find her.
Speaker 2 (24:31):
So he claims that Guandik was just out for a
stroll one day when all of a sudden, Gary condit
stops him just randomly, right and offers him twenty five
thousand dollars to murder his intern Is that what you're saying?
Speaker 1 (24:50):
Yeah, I mean it leaves a lot up to chance. Right,
he just happened to stumble upon somebody who is willing
to kill somebody for a twenty five grand right?
Speaker 3 (24:59):
Yeah? Did he look like a killer?
Speaker 4 (25:01):
Like?
Speaker 1 (25:01):
What's that? Like?
Speaker 2 (25:02):
I don't even that doesn't make any sense. I mean
he's just, you know, randomly driving through the streets of
DC looking for someone who looks like they.
Speaker 4 (25:09):
Look like a killer and that they take money to
kill her. Yeah, that's super far fetched. I just have
to say, hmmmm, I don't buy it.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Yeah, And the more you read into it, the more
weird it becomes. So I'll read the rest of the
quote here. The informant said, guandi K told him he
took drugs and drank alcohol to steel himself for the attack.
He went to the location cond it gave him and
saw Chandra running on a path. Guandik hid in the bushes,
and when Chondra circled back, he jumped out and attacked her,
(25:40):
stabbing her in the neck and the stomach. She fell
to the ground and Guandik carried her body far into
the woods. He dug a hole with his hands and
covered Schondra with dirt, leaves and sticks. He left the
knife in her body and later considered retrieving it, but
never did. He sent the twenty five thousand dollars to
his family in El Salvador quote.
Speaker 4 (26:01):
So, according to Morality's account, there should have been a
knife found at the scene, and was a knife ever found?
Speaker 1 (26:10):
Trevor, No, Yeah, there was no knife. So I mean,
this is making all of what Morales is saying here
to be really fishy. So what happens then is that
Morales agreed to tell this story on the witness stand
in return for better conditions in prison. And I think
that's when the full picture of what's probably really going
on here comes into view, right.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
Yeah, totally, But do we know who Guandique is like,
is this the guy that killed Chandra Levy? I mean,
I don't think we're sold on that, or are we
I'm not quite yet.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
Yeah. I mean we know that he's an immigrant from
El Salvador, we know he doesn't speak English. That summer,
he had actually been arrested earlier for attacking to women
in Rock Creek Park. So all of this is going
on in two thousand and two, the year after Chandra
Lee he was killed, and Guandi Ku went on to
be sentenced to ten years for said crimes, but he
(27:06):
did deny killing Schandra Levy and there was still no
physical evidence connecting him to the murder. So there was
a bit of a pattern here that maybe connected him,
but that's entirely circumstantial.
Speaker 3 (27:16):
In the same part the year after she was killed.
Speaker 1 (27:19):
Sure, I mean, I see how you can maybe draw
those conclusions or how that might set him up to
look guilty, but again, no physical evidence. That knife was
never found, right right right?
Speaker 2 (27:33):
I got another question though, what about I wonder if
they ever traced to see if there was ever any
money exchange, Like was the twenty five thousand dollars ever
sent to his family?
Speaker 1 (27:44):
Yeah? I mean the other thing you can check is
whether or not Gary Condit, you withdrew any large sums
of money close to twenty five grand on the days
leading up to her murder, which would also you know,
back that account up. I don't think that looked into that.
If they did, I don't know about it. Well. So
then in two thousand and nine, a new DC Police
(28:06):
chief decided to reopen the case, and investigators in DC
Police announce that they are charging Guandi Kay for the
assault and murder of Chandra Levy. So his trial begins
in October of two thousand and nine. The two women
Guandique was convicted of attacking in the park both testify
at this time, and they describe how he attacked them
(28:26):
as they jogged alone in the park, so sounding a
little familiar perhaps same emo. One woman says he dragged
her down a ravine and attacked her with a knife.
Chandra Levi's father also takes the stand and says he
believes Gary Khannit is still the most likely suspect, and
he reveals that Chandra and Condit had concocted a quote
(28:47):
five year plan prior to her death, in which he
would divorce his current wife and Mary Chandra. So it
sounds like maybe they were planning on running away together
and maybe something went wrong, at least according to the.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
Father, right right, right.
Speaker 1 (29:00):
So then a condut himself takes the stand and testifies,
and when asked whether he and Chondra had a sexual relationship,
he refused to answer flat out, and he said he
did this out of respect for Chandra. So an FBI
biologist also revealed that semen found on a pair of
Sandra's underwear match that of condits found in her apartment.
Speaker 2 (29:22):
That is so fishy and I just I just have
to throw my two cents in here, like he in
that he says out of respect for Chandra. No respect
for Chandra would be telling the truth by saying, yes,
we had a sexual relationship, that is respect.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Yeah. Yeah, we know he's full of shit.
Speaker 4 (29:42):
Yeah, he'd been married since I think nineteen sixty seven,
so he was trying to save everything from burning down.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
I think that.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
Said, I mean, regardless of whether or not he was
having an affair, which it sounds like he was, right,
he doesn't necessarily mean he killed her. I mean the
fact that they find semen on the panties in her
apartment suggests they were having a sexual relationship, and frankly,
nothing more, right, I mean, the fact that they were
having an affair near the time that she was killed
is certainly suspicious and fishy, but that's not physical evidence
(30:13):
tying him to her murder, right.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
Right, It is a potential motive, but it's not.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Yeah, yeah, potentially. So Anyways, the jury finds guandi Ka
guilty of two counts of first degree murder, so a
juror later claimed that their decision was mostly based on
Morales's testimony that he gave, and guandi k was then
sentenced to sixty years in prison.
Speaker 4 (30:36):
I watched a show about Chandra Levy this past week.
I believe it was on Oxygen, and they interviewed Chandra's
mom and dad, and when that verdict came down, you know,
like they had to have an interpreter for guandi Kie
because again he didn't speak English, and they asked him
if he killed you know, Schandra Levy, And you know,
(30:59):
they were saying in this documentary that they didn't even
need an interpreter because he was like, I am he
said it in Spanish, but he's like, I'm something along
the lines of I'm so sorry for your loss, But
I did not kill Schandra Levy. And like mom, dad,
you know, like they had they stated in this documentary
that they had doubt. And it's just I don't even
(31:23):
know how they convicted him on his cellmate's testimony when
there's no other evidence. But you know, Gwandique ends up
writing a letter to a reporter at the Washington Post
after that verdict, and after he said all that in
the courtroom, he says, of course that everything was false,
the evidence presented by the government and Monals his testimony
(31:44):
was false, and of course his attorney files on appeal
and in May twenty fifteen, prosecutors agreed to hold a
new trial after the defense argued that informant Morales had
perjured himself on the stand.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Dang, and this is two thousand and fifty, this is
now a full fourteen years after Chandra Levy was murdered.
Speaker 1 (32:06):
Yeah, I mean, wrongful conviction puts people in prison for
decades and decades sometimes, you know, that said he was
convicted of probably rightfully attacking other women for which he
should have been in prison, So you know, maybe he
was going to be there anyways, but you know, at
least in this case, it seems like, at least from
my perspective, Guandi Kay is correct in the fact that
(32:28):
all of this was false and that he was not
actually guilty of murdering Chandra Levy. So there's a pretty
good quote from the AP that sums us all up
that I'll read very quickly. Quote. Authorities acknowledged that they
had no DNA evidence or witnesses linking gue d Ka
to the crime, building their prosecution instead around a jail
house informant who said Guandika had confessed behind bars that
(32:50):
he was responsible for Levi's death. They also said the
attack on Levy fit a pattern of assaults by Guandi
Kay on other female joggers in the same where she
went missing and during the same timeframe. So Guandique, who
was already in prison for those attacks when he was
accused in Levy's death in two thousand and nine, professed
innocence at his sentencing hearing. His lawyers said police and
(33:14):
prosecutors made him escapegoat for a botched investigation. And I
do think that sums up what we know about this
investigation so far.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
Absolutely what a freaking miss hot mess.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
Yeah, So what this appears to be then is that
Morale is the person who gave this testimony, was looking
for a lighter sentence and saw an opportunity to rat
out somebody else to get that. And then some things
happened that back this up. So when prosecutors and the
judge agreed to hold a new trial, it comes to
(33:47):
light that Armando Morales had actually testified in federal cases before,
and that the prosecution knew this but failed to disclose it.
The defense argued that this misconduct warranted the charges against
Guandigae be completely dropped. So this is something he had
been doing frequently along with investigators, to nail people who
(34:09):
may not have been responsible so that they could close
their cases and Morales could get shorter sentences.
Speaker 4 (34:15):
Pooh, yeah, well it's horrible, totally horrible, And you know, meanwhile,
and this is this is a little crazy. But Armando
Morales's neighbor ends up coming forward and she's made a
bunch of secret recordings of her conversations with Morales in
which he talked about being the key witness in the
(34:36):
Chandra Levy case and flat out says that he lied
about Guandique's confession to improve his prison conditions, just like
you said, Trevor, And so in light of you know
this development, all charges against Guandique are indeed dropped again
no physical evidence against him, and without the testimony of Morales,
(34:59):
they have not nothing.
Speaker 3 (35:01):
So basically they're back to square one, sadly.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Yeah, yeah, And where the story essentially ends is that
in May of twenty seventeen, Guandi Ku was deported back
to El Salvador. Gary Condit's career was essentially destroyed by this.
As you would imagine, he was voted out of office
in two thousand and two, very likely from all the
negative press he was receiving. He then moved to Phoenix,
(35:24):
where he and his wife attempted and failed at a
couple of Baskin Robbins franchises that they briefly owned. And
so yeah, nobody walked away from this unscathed.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
Yeah yeah, And I you know, again, the sad thing
about all this is like we still don't know who
the real murderer is, Like we still.
Speaker 3 (35:44):
Have no clue.
Speaker 1 (35:46):
Yeah, I mean again, because police were so hyper fixated
on Gary Condit's involvement and the testimony, the false testimony
that they had from Morales, right that they really failed
to dedicate the time and resources to looking at a
wise range of suspects and looking at all of the
evidence in front of them. And so now it's years
(36:07):
decades later almost, and you know, we have nothing really
left to work with. There's essentially no way to solve
this space on where we're at now, right.
Speaker 3 (36:15):
And that's what I think so tragic, right.
Speaker 4 (36:18):
And you know, when I was listening to Chandra's mom
and dad speak in that Oxygen documentary, her mom said,
she's like, you know, even if we find out who
killed my daughter, it's not going to bring her back.
And that was like, oh, like, it just broke my
(36:38):
heart even more, you know. And I will say one
thing with like Gary Condent being, you know, such a
big headline, and this is something her mom, you know,
chimed in about as well. She doesn't think that she
would have gotten as much media coverage if her daughter
hadn't been involved with him, because it was such a
sensationalized media story that you know, she was going, her
(37:01):
and her husband were going on different news programs to
talk about their missing daughter because she hadn't been found
for that entire year.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
But through all of that.
Speaker 4 (37:09):
And with nine to eleven happening. You know, we no
one really got to see who Chandra Levy was as
a human being. She was more of just a headline.
And that's what's so heartbreaking.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
Absolutely I think what you said is absolutely true, you know,
And what we have to remember is that, you know,
she was more than a headline. She was a human
being just at the start of her life.
Speaker 4 (37:40):
So that brings us to this week's emua, our final
message of hope and healing. Our EMUA goes to Chandra Levy.
If those in charge of finding justice for her murder
had paid more attention to Chandra's actual actions in the
final hours of her life, then maybe her family might
have some measure of justice today. Instead, the police and
(38:04):
the justice system focused on innuendo, scandal headlines, and when
all of that failed, they ended up finding a scapegoat
on which to pin her.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Death, and few bothered to know her in the weeks
and months when doing so might have made a difference.
And so we'll take a moment now to honor her life.
Chandra Ann Levy was more than the worst thing that
ever happened to her. She was a fun, loving and
playful sister. She was prone to being an occasional big
(38:38):
sister BOSSI. She played Little League and she loved the
San Francisco Giants. And she was a bright, brilliant young woman,
you know, doing her thing working in DC.
Speaker 4 (38:56):
Yes, and she was an individual who didn't like being
told what to do. She was a very independent and
vibrant young woman with a bright future that should have
been hers to claim today and always we honor you, Chandra,
Onward and upward, Emua, emua.
Speaker 3 (39:22):
Well, that is our show for today.
Speaker 2 (39:24):
We'd love to hear what you thought about today's discussion
and if there was a case that you'd like us
to cover, please find us on social media or email
us at facinevil pod at tenderfoot dot tv.
Speaker 4 (39:38):
And one request, if you haven't already, please find us
on iTunes and give us a good review and a
good rating. If you like what we do, your support
is always cherished.
Speaker 2 (39:48):
Until next time, ah Looha.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
Facing Evil is a production of iHeartRadio and Tenderfoot TV.
The show is hosted by Russia Peccuerero and Avet Gentile.
Matt Frederick and Alex Williams our executive producers on behalf
of iHeartRadio, with producers Trevor Young, and Jesse Funk, Donald
Albright in Payne Lindsay our executive producers on behalf of
(40:26):
Tenderfoot TV, alongside producer Tracy Kaplan. Our researcher is Claudia Dafrico.
Original music by Makeup and Vanity Set. Find us on
social media or email us at facingevilpod at tenderfoot dot tv.
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio or Tenderfoot TV, visit the
iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your
(40:50):
favorite shows
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.