Salvadoran illegal alien arrested in Chandra Levy murder
When a society opens up its borders to people like this
lots of people like this end up dead:
And their families end up with a lifetime of pain.
At the news conference today announcing the arrest of Ingmar Guandigue for the murder of Chandra Levy (see story below), Jeffrey Taylor, the U.S. attorney in the case, said: “We believe Levy was a random victim of Guandique.” Random. What does that mean? Does it mean that it was just as likely that Guandique might have murdered a thirty year old Asian man or a sixty year old black lady or a twenty year old Hispanic male? Guandique was casing out Rock Creek Park, looking for white female joggers, two of whom he had attempted unsuccessfully to rape and perhaps kill in the period just before he’s accused of killing Levy. Yet this liberal moron Taylor says Levy was a “random” victim. If Taylor simply means that Guandique didn’t know Levy before attacking her, well, that’s true of all violent crimes that are not acquaintance crimes. So what information is added by calling this a “random” attack? It’s pure liberal mind control, trying to attenuate the moral evil of the crime, and the specific ethnic nature of it: brown-skinned illegal alien lurking in isolated woods looking for pretty white women to rape and kill.
And now watch the rational Randian supermen over at Rational Passion get the vapors over the simple reality of what I’ve just said.
As I wrote on February 22:
[T]here were two aspects of Eloihood at work in this murder: the Eloihood of our whole society in allowing mass legal and illegal Third-World immigration, and the Eloihood of individual whites, particularly young women, who with spectacular carelessness keep putting themselves in situations where they get killed by nonwhites.
Rest assured. The thought will never occur in the mind of a single liberal or mainstream “conservative” that admitting millions of poor and backward nonwhites into a wide-open, sexually liberated, prosperous white country filled with attractive young women is an inherently dangerous thing to do. Because that would mean admitting that there is evil in human beings, and that there are differences between human groups that matter.
When I say these things, when I post photos like the ones in this entry, am I stirring up fear and hatred against Hispanic persons as individuals? No. Am I conveying the message that all or most Hispanic people are criminally dangerous? No. I am saying that when you admit a mass immigration of people who are racially and culturally different from and less developed than the host people, a steady occurence of assaults, robberies, rapes and murders by that minority against the host people becomes inevitable. It’s just a fact of reality, pointing to the larger fact of the suicidal nature of mass diverse immigration. It has nothing to do with having negative feelings toward Hispanics or other nonwhites as individuals. It has nothing to do with hating anybody. It has to do with seeing what is
Recent VFR entries on this story are here and here.
Here’s the CNN article on the announcement of the arrest::
WASHINGTON (CNN)—Nearly seven years after the remains of federal intern Chandra Levy were found in a Washington park, a jailed laborer from El Salvador faces a murder charge in her death, authorities said Tuesday.
A judge on Tuesday signed an arrest warrant for Ingmar Guandique, 27, who is serving a 10-year sentence for two assaults in Rock Creek Park that occurred around the time of Levy’s disappearance.
Her remains were found in Rock Creek Park about a year after she was reported missing.
“We believe Levy was a random victim of Guandique, who attacked and killed her as she jogged in Rock Creek Park,” said Jeffrey Taylor, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia….
Guandique faces a first-degree murder charge. A conviction on the charge would bring a mandatory sentence of 30 to 60 years in prison, Taylor said….
A California native working as an intern for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Levy, 24, disappeared May 1, 2001. Her remains were found in May 2002 by a man walking his dog in a remote area of the park.
Guandique has been imprisoned at the Federal Correctional Institution-Victorville, a medium-security facility northeast of Los Angeles, California. Officials hope to transfer him from California to the nation’s capital in 45 to 60 days.
He’s serving his sentence on the two assault convictions in California because there are no federal prisons in the District of Columbia. Those convicted of federal crimes in the capital are sent to various federal prisons across the country.
Guandique was considered a person of interest in 2002 in connection with Levy’s death, authorities said Tuesday. Before the new charges, his projected release date from prison was October 5, 2011.
According to officials at Tuesday’s news conference—and the affidavit supporting the arrest warrant for Guandique—circumstantial evidence played a large role in the case. Authorities presented no evidence Tuesday of anyone seeing Guandique and Levy together.
But the affidavit said a witness reported seeing and running from a man in the park, and she said she believed that occurred on the same day as Levy disappeared. Upon seeing a photograph of Guandique in the interim, the woman thought he looked like the man who followed her in the park, the affidavit said.
Another witness reported seeing Guandique with “a fat lip and scratches on his face” about the time of Levy’s disappearance, the affidavit said. The witness added that Guandique said he was injured by his girlfriend during an argument.
Interviewed by police, Guandique’s girlfriend at the time said that while he was violent with her on occasion, “at no time during any of the arguments or fights did [she] ever strike Guandique or cause any injuries to his face or neck.”
Two other witnesses reported that Guandique told them he committed crimes against women, including rape and murder, according to the affidavit. And another witness last month told police Guandique admitted his involvement in Levy’s killing, as well as that he tried to rape two other women in the park at knifepoint, the affidavit said.
When news emerged last month that Guandique’s arrest was imminent in the Levy case, the same witness told police Guandique “became very anxious and said something to the effect of, ‘[Expletive], it’s over. They got me now. What am I gonna do?’ “
Authorities searching Guandique’s cell in California in September found a photograph of Levy that apparently had been taken from a magazine, the affidavit said.
Speaking last month as news emerged that an arrest in the case was imminent, Levy’s mother, Susan, said, “It’s a bittersweet situation for me as the mother of a daughter who is no longer here. I want justice. I want to know that the person who did it is in jail and will not do it to anybody else.”
She added, “Every day the elephant is there. Every day you get a knot in your stomach. It doesn’t go away. It’s a life sentence for the families and relatives that miss their loved ones. We have a life sentence of hurt.”
Leonard D. writes:
“what information is added by calling this a “random” attack?”
You mentioned one such aspect: to obscure the fact that rapists are only male, disproportionately NAMs, and target women, most particularly young women. But I think even progressives know this, and are willing to admit it. Certainly I think it is assumed. I think the desire to obscure these facts explains some of the motivation here, but not most of it. [LA replies: I respectfully request that commenters avoid abbreviations. I don’t know what NAMs means, and a Google search turns up many possibilities, including the North American Menopause Society, the North American Membranes Society, the National Association of Marine Surveyors, and the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety.]
You did not mention what I think was the primary obscurantist meaning of “random.” Something that is truly random is, by definition, something one cannot predict or avoid. For example, when a meteor hits the ground, what it hits is truly random. Nobody takes measures to avoid meteors, because it is not possible. But clearly this rape/murder was not random in that sense. The perp chose the location carefully, to maximize the chance of running into a lone victim. And Levy placed herself into that position, just as you noted on Feb 22.
This is, I think, what the use of “random” is chiefly there for: to hide the fact that Levy was acting foolishly, or at the very least, taking risks. As usual, I will charged with “blaming the victim.” I reject that—she was innocent, no matter how foolishly or recklessly she acted. And I think this is exactly one reason why we see “random” and other such obscurantism: a good intention, not to further inflict pain on the victim’s family. Thus it comes easily to the lips even of people who would otherwise not speak so.
Another aspect of the meaning of “random” in modern obscurespeak is to cover up the culpability of the state, in that it is failing in its primary responsibility: it does not keep the streets safe. If crime is random, then it cannot have been prevented by better policing. But crime is not random in that sense. Crime rates exploded in the 20th century, in spite of numerous technological breakthroughs that would lead one to expect lower crime, not higher. Back in the ’50s, people routinely did use the parks; the streets were safe, etc. It is not like there is some lost technology that prevents us from being able to police as we did then. Rather, it is changes in the law, and in police and judicial procedure and personnel. These can be reversed. This is what progressives fear. [LA replies: In his autobiography, Thomas Sowell speaks of how in his childhood he and his family in Harlem slept outdoors in the parks on hot summer nights.]
David B. writes:
Last night, only Greta Van Susteren on her FNC show had anything on the arrest in the Chandra Levy murder. Today cnn.com had the most comprehensive account I have found.
The search in 2001 was restricted to paved roads from the clips I saw. The body was found a year later off a jogging trail which is where the search should have been conducted. In a clip I saw, the spot were she was found looks like it is in a rural area, which it is not. It is amazing that young women see nothing dangerous about jogging alone in these places right next to an urban Washington D.C.
At the end of the FNC segment, Michael Baden asked Van Susteren, “How far was this from where you live, Greta?” She answered, “Not far, I might add. Probably around 3000 yards, maybe, I don’t know. Not far. That is why I do not jog.”
I would never, ever, go jogging alone in a secluded place in a park in a big city with a significant black and Hispanic population. But 22 year old Chandra thought nothing of it.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 03, 2009 06:52 PM | Send
I said to a friend today that modern liberal society can be described as a factory for producing young female murder victims. It produces and unleashes the perpetrators, and, via its schools and cultural messages, it turns out a steady supply of victims, young women who think they can do anything, who think there’s no danger anywhere—young women who apparently never look at a newspaper or watch the local TV news or are aware that young women are being murdered all the time; or, if they were aware of it, they would dismiss the knowledge, as it would be overrided by the prime cultural message that women are free and can do what they like, and, of course, should never, ever, fear a nonwhite.
Van Susteren’s comment about never going jogging is stupid. It’s not a question of jogging, but of putting oneself in a secluded area.