I hope in a way that this is true. Maybe if it is, her family can get some closure. Here’s the article.
Huh.
I wonder if they already know it’s Levy’s body… Otherwise, why would they find a female skeleton and assume that it’s her? I suppose they can tell how long the body’s been there, but would anyone make that possible connection officially known without a little more proof?
On the news they were saying that they couldn’t be sure yet, there are clothes, but nobody knows what she was wearing the day she disappeared. They are now also saying that they are not sure if the body is even female.
I think they are believing that it’s Chandra because her computer shows that she was looking at the park the day she disappeared.
If it is her, I wonder if she just fell off of a cliff or something, that it was an accident, no foul play at all, not that I know anything about the park.
Seems a bit premature to guess it’s Chandra. It will be interesting to see how Gary reacts to this news.
Rock Creek Park is pretty much lacking in cliffs, though I suppose you could jump off one of the overpasses.
I suspect they must have some kind of unreleased info that makes them think it’s Levy. Not to sound gory, but DC isn’t exactly lacking in the unattended-dead-bodies department.
Here’s the Washington Post’s take on it so far:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56845-2002May22.html
For those of you that know the area - is this park the kind of spot where the body of someone that died accidentally could remain undiscovered this long?
Not really. Rock Creek Park is big, but there are hikers and joggers and bikers there every day. It’s a busy place, it’s right in the heart of DC, and it’s within reasonable walking distance of several Red Line Metro stops. It’s not at all isolated.
Yep-Booklover-that is exactly what I was trying to say.
However, most folks stick to the paths and certain well-known areas. There’s certainly plenty of woodsy underbrush and not very well-lit areas that people would purposely avoid. To my thinking, this actually would make it a pretty decent place to stash a body.
I guess it could considering that Rock Creek is very large (it basically dissects the city in two as it runs through the middle). But this was an area that was first pinpointed to search when Chandra was first announced as missing. Police officers, dogs and large search teams scoured the park looking for her, scraps of clothing, etc. It seems strange that they would not have located her body at that time and it could now be discovered by a jogger.
Rock Creek Park is essentially a giant ravine, named for the creek at the bottom. The trails mostly follow the bottom, and many of the hills are pretty steep and don’t invite hiking. A body on a wooded hill there could be there a while.
The story also says the clothes were found near the body. Not actually on the body. Maybe the story didn’t mean to make that distinction, but if so it would seem to rule in foul play, unless she was an exhibitionist.
On the other hand, clothes can be scattered by animal scavengers, or the clothes found could be totally unrelated to the body found (they could, for example, belong to one of the many homeless people in DC).
They did apparently search that area originally, but I think in the Post article Ramsey says something to the effect that it’s a difficult area to search thoroughly.
Doesn’t seem to me if Gary Condit were involved in her disappearance that hiding the body in the same city where you work would be all that smart. Unless he’s an idiot (and he may be, I don’t konw enought about the story to make an educatied decision) he looks more innocent. Again, I’m not up on the story 100%.
Not that I’m an expert on the area or finding bodies, but I recall reading way back when this was the national story (those were the days) that they searched Rock Creek Park pretty thoroughly. Seems very odd that a trained search force complete with dogs would miss a body that was exposed enough for someone just jogging by to find it.
The plot thickens (if it’s her, that is).
As far as the body being in a heavily travelled area and still not found:
Oddly, it happens all the time. There are reports (my personal resources come from William R. Maples’ excellent text Dead Men Do Tell Tales and Douglas Ubelaker’s Bones) of policemen searching an area heavily and finding one body, but missing two others that were in “plain sight” at the same location, or of bodies not being found because the bones appeared to be sticks normally protruding from the ground (in that particular case, found because a policeman had to urinate. Go figure).
Now, as far as how the body will be identified - I presume they’ll bring in a forensic pathologist or forensic anthropologist (like the aforementioned gentlemen) and have them look at the skeleton. Also, a forensic dentist will likely be called in, and both the bones and the teeth of the skeleton will be compared to x-rays of Ms. Levy taken while she was alive.
Any means of death that could have left a mark on the bones will also be explored.
In a way, I hope it is her, if only so the family can get some closure. Not the closure they want, of course, but closure nonetheless.
This just in: they confirmed that is is indeed Chandra Levy’s body.
Wonderful what the news can do, ain’t it?
Calling his lawyer, I’d suppose. Even if he didn’t do it, he knows darn well he’s the prime suspect.