San Francisco Chronicle

Chandra Levy case revisited in special that relives frenzy

- DAVID WIEGAND Television

Is any crime ever really solved? If you watch a lot of television, you may have good reason to ask that question. From Jack the Ripper to the Petersons, Drew and Scott, television has fed off true crime stories for decades. It doesn’t matter whether the case is open, shut or cold, true crime shows keep the story going.

If the feeding frenzy seems especially intense these days, it is thanks, in part, to the deserved success of Ryan Murphy’s “The People vs. OJ Simpson: American Crime Story.” But heavily covered crime stories are a natural because you already have the attention of the audience, not to mention the raw materials in the form of archival footage from when the case was originally covered by the media. It’s great economics, no matter how you look at it. All you have to do is promise “new informatio­n” and throw a couple of hyperventi­lating journalist­s in front of the camera to call fill-in-the-blank as the crime of the century.

There are three basic ways to revisit true crime stories: dramatize, as Murphy did; employ a documentar­y style, using archival footage and contempora­ry interviews with those involved in the crime; and a mix of the two, which you’ll find on HLN’s “Forensic Files.”

Any of the three formats can be effective, and all three can be manipulate­d and misused for what TV cares most about: dramatic effect to hook viewers. “Chandra Levy: An American Murder Mystery,” premiering Monday, Sept. 4, on TLC, uses the third approach, mixing archival footage, re-created scenes and interviews with key figures in one of the most famous cases of the new century.

In May 2001, Robert and Susan Levy of Modesto were concerned because they hadn’t heard from their daughter in a while and that was unlike her. She was in Washington, working as an intern with the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Now she was missing.

The Levys had to wait an entire year to have their worst fears confirmed, when their daughter’s skeletal remains were found in Washington’s Rock Creek Park. They had already informed the police that their daughter had been having an affair with their congressma­n, Rep. Gary Condit.

Even before the body was found, the story sparked unrelentin­g saturation coverage by the media. A missing intern, an alleged affair with a married congressma­n: What else did you need?

Condit never admitted the affair, but his political career was over. As far as voters in his district and the general public were concerned, he didn’t have to say the words.

Eight years after Chandra’s remains were found, a Salvadoran immigrant named Ingmar Guandique who was in the country illegally was arrested, ultimately found guilty of Chandra’s murder and was sentenced to 60 years in prison.

To the astonishme­nt of many, the case heated up again in 2015 when Guandique was granted a new trial. Last year, federal prosecutor­s said they wouldn’t retry him but, instead, deport him.

Those are the basic facts, but the devil is in the details.

“Chandra Levy” reminds us that no matter how methodical crime solving may seem in fictionali­zed TV shows, it’s a pretty messy business. As with the Scott Peterson case, media pressure can be a factor in how and perhaps whether a case is solved.

Among those contributi­ng to the “Chandra Levy” documentar­y are journalist­s Jane Velez Mitchell, Diane Dimond, Sylvia Moreno, Michael Doyle, Connie Chung and Dylan Howard, editor of the National Enquirer and executive producer of “American Murder Mystery.”

Susan and Robert Levy are, of course, featured in both archival and contempora­ry footage, demonstrat­ing that the depth of their loss and determinat­ion to keep their daughter’s memory alive have not diminished with time.

Among the missing are Condit, of course, and the original prosecutor in the case, Amanda Haines.

The “usual suspects” — not literally, but the figures we all remember from the coverage — dominate the documentar­y, but “Chandra Levy” relies most heavily on two: Vince Flammini, Condit’s former driver and self-described “best friend” (“I mean, who knows better than the driver?”) and Joe McCann, the private investigat­or hired by the Levys.

Flammini, who was fired by Condit in 2001, says that his ex-boss used to go to Rock Creek Park all the time and that he tried to tell that to “the FBI and different people but they didn’t want to hear it.”

“I mean, jeez, you don’t think of your best friend as a murderer.”

McCann provides some useful informatio­n, such as the observatio­n that while it was assumed Chandra was jogging in the park when she was attacked, the trail she was on was a horse trail, strewn with rocks and not a place you’d expect to find a runner.

He also points to a blanket, tossed into a corner of Levy’s apartment, suggesting that she had left in a certain degree of haste to go to Rock Creek Park on the day of her death.

Moreno gets Guandique on the telephone while he’s being kept at a transition­al facility before deportatio­n. To no one’s surprise, he denies murdering Levy.

The documentar­y suggests it has something to add to the case, but ultimately, also to the surprise of no one, it doesn’t really.

You have to ask if these shows have any real value to anyone, other than, of course, the networks that create them. There’s nothing very new in “Chandra Levy” — Flammini has little credibilit­y and a first-year law student could tear him apart in five minutes on the stand. McCann is principled, but of course, principles don’t always play well on reality television, do they?

It should go without saying that virtually every entry into the overcrowde­d true crime field promises shocking new informatio­n. Sometimes it’s actually new, but it’s rarely shocking.

We get no new insight into Guandique and of course Condit still won’t talk about his relationsh­ip with Chandra.

Our hearts ache all over again for the burden Robert and Susan Levy have had to carry, and the documentar­y is probably useful for them to remind the world that their daughter lived and had a bright future.

All we get really is a dubious chance to relive the media frenzy that turned tragic loss into some perverse form of entertainm­ent for tabloid TV.

By the way, next up for “An American Murder Mystery”: a three-night “television event,” “Casey Anthony,” premiering on Sept. 9.

True crime, for better or worse, is a gift that just keeps on giving, even if the package is mostly empty.

 ?? Associated Press 2001 ?? The disappeara­nce of Chandra Levy in 2001 is the subject of “Chandra Levy: An American Murder Mystery” on TLC.
Associated Press 2001 The disappeara­nce of Chandra Levy in 2001 is the subject of “Chandra Levy: An American Murder Mystery” on TLC.
 ?? Jacquelyn Martin / Associated Press 2009 ?? Ingmar Guandique, arrested in 2009 and convicted of killing Washington intern Chandra Levy, was deported in May.
Jacquelyn Martin / Associated Press 2009 Ingmar Guandique, arrested in 2009 and convicted of killing Washington intern Chandra Levy, was deported in May.
 ?? Courtesy Jennifer Baker 2000 ?? Chandra Ann Levy (left) of Modesto and her friend Jennifer Baker flank Democratic Rep. Gary Condit in the congressma­n's office in Washington in 2000.
Courtesy Jennifer Baker 2000 Chandra Ann Levy (left) of Modesto and her friend Jennifer Baker flank Democratic Rep. Gary Condit in the congressma­n's office in Washington in 2000.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States