When Chandra Levy vanished in 2001, everyone suspected her lover, Gary Condit. A California congressman at the time, Condit was hounded by reporters and then rejected by voters.
“Guilty — guilty — guilty,” the armchair judges and juries said. Actually, no. Condit was never charged with a crime. He was guilty of getting caught having an affair with his intern, a tawdry and tired narrative here in Power Town. After Levy disappeared, and cops suspected foul play. The FBI searched her laundry and found panties with Condit’s DNA. This evidence linked Condit to poor Chandra, but there was no evidence that he had anything to do with her demise.
There is precious little evidence in the two most notorious recent murders in Washington, D.C. — Chandra Levy, whose bones were found in Rock Creek Park; and attorney Robert Wone, who was stabbed to death in a Dupont Circle town house in 2006. And that’s why we might never know what happened to these two innocent people, and their families might never find peace.
In both cases, everyone seemed to know who the killer was, or the killers. Open-and-shut cases!
In the Levy case, the press tried and convicted Condit. But there was no evidence for it. Now the killer has to be Ingmar Guandique, the man standing trial for murder now in Superior Court. Again, reporters have fingered Guandique, an illegal immigrant. Again, there is no hard evidence. And again, prosecutors are struggling to get a conviction.
In the Wone case, the killers had to be one or two of the three roommates who lived in the house where police found his body. Had to be, right? Or the three — Michael Price, Dylan Ward and Victor Zaborsky — had to know the killer. Open-and-shut case!
But there was a problem with the Wone case: no evidence.
Prosecutors brought charges against the three roommates for conspiracy and obstruction and tampering — but never for the actual murder — because they didn’t have the goods.
We are a community of cops and lawyers, schooled in the ways of the criminal justice system by TV shows such as “Law & Order,” “Criminal Minds” and “CSI.” The cops always get their criminal, and the judge always puts them away. Justice done — no muss, no fuss.
But down around Judiciary Square, prosecutors have to make their cases in superior or federal court with more than hunches and press clips. They need strong physical evidence, witnesses, or a confession. Having none of the three, they will rarely get a judge and jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
What you see on TV is perfect police investigations, sophisticated labs where forensic scientists find incriminating evidence in dust specks, and dashing lawyers who break down witnesses. What we have in the nation’s capital is shoddy police work, no forensic lab, and prosecutors pressing cases with little ammo.
And that’s why — in real life — murderers get off scot-free.
Harry Jaffe’s column appears on Tuesday and Friday. He can be contacted at [email protected].
Harry Jaffe’s column appears on Tuesday and Friday. He can be contacted at [email protected].
