Ingmar Guandique killed Chandra Levy. A District of Columbia jury says so. Never mind that there's not any forensic evidence to support that verdict or any eyewitness testimony.

Continue reading

A guilty verdict in the absence of such evidence can mean only one thing: Prosecutors Amanda Haines and Fernando Campoamor-Sanchez did some really good work. "That was a miracle," Levy's mother, Susan, proclaimed outside the courthouse Monday afternoon as she embraced Haines, according to the Washington Post.

"Miracles happen," Haines replied. 

In the beginning, the Levy murder case had all the makings of a great courthouse drama. There were the facts — a mystery so compelling and a police investigation so twisted that it triggered an unprecedented 12-part series in the Post. Then, the characters — Levy, former U.S. Rep. Gary Condit, jailhouse snitches, and ultimately, a gang-member suspect. And, finally, the talent. The prosecution featured cold-case master Haines, and the defense starred top-notch public defender Santha Sonenberg.

But for all the build up, the trial was an underwhelming bookend to a story that for a few months in 2001 held the nation's attention. No one provided an account of Levy's final moments. No damning lab test sealed the case. After nearly a decade, attorneys cobbled together pieces of a hazy story and hoped that at least part of it would stick with the jury.

It's unfair to point fingers at the lawyers who shouldered the task. Sonenberg and Maria Hawilo did what they could with what they had, and Haines and Campoamor pulled off what seemed impossible — winning a case when there wasn't much of one to present.

The government admitted its story would have flaws, but got off to a good start with the emotional testimony of a woman whom Guandique attacked on an isolated Rock Creek Park trail around the time Chandra Levy died. What followed during the next few weeks, though, was a string of less-than-impressive witnesses. So the prosecutors, stuck with a drawn-out and disastrous police investigation, and the defense, stuck with a tough-to-defend client, sometimes seemed to struggle during testimony in Courtroom 320.

In the end, the best each side could manage were conflicting stories from jailhouse snitches who used to share a cell with Guandique. A review of the pitfalls:

Prosecution

• A jailhouse informant, who took the stand in a bright orange jumpsuit to tell  the court that Guandique said he had murdered Levy. After years in prison, Armando Morales insisted that he wanted nothing in exchange for his testimony. He later said: "If they were to let me go home, that would be nice."

• A fallen ex-congressman, who defiantly refused to answer questions about whether he had an intimate relationship with Levy. Gary Condit at times came off as unnecessarily defensive and evasive on the stand, and he seemed more willing to protect his own interests than speak for a 24-year-old woman who he said was his friend.