Now that a suspect has finally been charged in the 2001 murder of former Washington intern Chandra Levy, former California Congressman Gary Condit has at last been vindicated. Condit, who has been married for more than 40 years, admitted to having an affair with Levy shortly before her death.
Although the police never considered him a suspect, many in the media suggested both directly and indirectly that Condit may have had some involvement in Levy's disappearance and death. In fact, his image was tarnished so much that he was defeated in a Democratic primary for re-election to his House seat a year later and has never served in elective office since leaving Congress in January 2003.
Condit has filed several lawsuits and apparently plans more. But would he be justified in doing so? Some would argue that he brought much of the situation on himself by not being forthcoming when questions began to be raised. I say the way Condit handled himself doesn't matter. If someone claimed that he killed Levy, they were wrong. Condit was right in maintaining his innocence.
Bottom line, he was right and his accusers were wrong. He is justified in suing. If someone wasn't sure about his guilt, they should have kept their mouth shut. His actions at the time, however ill-advised they might have been, did not give anyone the right to accuse him of being a murderer.
Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, freelance writer, amateur political analyst, and blogger from Virginia, USA. He posts a least one article a day to his blog - http://commenterry.blogs.com - on subjects such as current events, politics, technology, society and culture, religion, health and well-being, self improvement, personal finance, trivia, and sports. Terry is also the owner and operator of a website that is dedicated to allowing U.S. citizens to find all types of insurance at reasonable prices.
Terry, I couldn't agree with you more...what is it in this country that makes us what we are? Innocent, until proven guilty? I think that would come into play here, and I absolutely agree with you on this one...Well said...and as usual, you never disappoint me in your articles, bring a legitimate argument to the table!!! Well done, I enjoyed the read....Your fan, and friend in pen....Gary
Oh interesting debate this is, Terry. I think he is not justified for suing. His wife would have been justified in suing him for a divorce but she didn't. He committed adultery not murder but in God's eyes, they're both sin. He merely suffered the consequences of his indiscretions. Had he not put himself in a vulnerable position, he would not have been accused or the media's suspect. He should take the same high road of his dear wife. Money won't repair his reputation. His innocence should be enough for him.
Just my humble point of view on this. I am happy for him, his wife and family that the murder rap will be cleared from his reputation. And God forgave him before he ever did the other. That's one reason I love Him so. *smile*
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
tweet this!
