Skip to main content
CNN.com /transcript


CNN TV
EDITIONS

CNN LARRY KING LIVE

Will Chandra Levy Ever Be Found?

Aired July 30, 2001 - 21:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, will Chandra Levy ever be found? D.C. police now say chances are just 50/50. Her family ignores the odds and vows to keep on hoping. Day 91 of this headline-grabbing mystery.

And with us is former prosecutor and best-selling author Barbara Olson, the defense attorney Mike Geragos, and former federal prosecutor Cynthia Alksne and former chief minority counsel Julian Epstein, and a journalist who has been tracking the story from day one is Lisa DePaulo.

They're all next on LARRY KING LIVE.

Before we start with our guests in studios in New York, Washington, and Los Angeles, we have with us on the phone Paul Katz, and also with Paul is his wife, Linda Zamsky.

Paul will be speaking, but if Linda wants to say something, she can jump in too. Linda is the aunt who first came forward to reveal that Chandra had revealed to her of the affair with Congressman Condit.

And we happen to have -- Paul, are you there?

PAUL KATZ, CHANDRA LEVY'S UNCLE: Yes, I am here, Larry.

KING: First, Paul, we understand that there are a couple of things on your mind that's bothering you, and then we will get into some questions. Go.

KATZ: Well, Larry, I guess that the thing that has been nudging and bothering me is that the police department had the knowledge of the affair with Mr. Condit and my niece Chandra from the 15th of May, until the actual time that he stepped forward with the release that Linda made available.

And they had this information, and yet, you know, one gets the filling that it was suppressed, for whatever reason, for such a long period of time and that's been very frustrating.

KING: You mean after your wife gave them the information, you don't think they did anything with it.

KATZ: That's correct. That's correct. And the second issue of that has bothered us immensely is the retraction of the statement regarding the affair with -- the supposed affair between the Congressman and his daughter.

KING: That's the minister?

KATZ: The minister, right. And what's really bothersome about this whole thing is that it was only a week between the time that Chandra came back to Susan and said, don't worry, mom, I talked to him about it and there's nothing to worry about. Until Chandra disappeared. And the whole sequence of things are very bothersome.

KING: Do you know Reverend Thomas?

KATZ: Yes, I met him.

KING: And do you believe him?

KATZ: Yes, I believe him.

KING: And why, then, is the daughter -- or was the daughter denying it?

KATZ: I think that clearly the daughter was frightened and, therefore, was not willing to come forward. He sat there in Susan's den and poured his heart out to the Susan, Bob, and I. And the sequence, so far as I see it, in the way that it happened is that he revealed to Susan and the situation between his daughter and the congressman, Susan immediately called Chandra on the phone.

Chandra's response was: I'm big enough to take care of myself. Don't worry about it. And a week later, she called Susan back. Tells Susan, I talked to him about it. It's nothing to worry about. A week after that. Chandra disappears.

KING: So, your suspicions grow, as does your wife's?

KATZ: Oh, definitely. Absolutely.

KING: Were you discouraged by the police statements that now it looks 50/50?

KATZ: Yeah, it took them so long to get the thing going and now they want to back off from the search. This is disheartening.

The other part about this whole thing is that you know, when -- when the reverend called and spoke to Linda and myself, he told us about how he was physically -- well he was threatened, verbally over the phone.

KING: By whom? Did he tell you who?

KATZ: Just some male voice. Didn't mention any names, just a male voice. And he was clearly frightened. And, you know, just these events. There's clearly something submerged still to be discovered about all of this.

KING: Well, at its worst, Paul, are you -- do you feel that Congress was involved in some way of harming your niece?

KATZ: Well, I would certainly think that there is some suspicion here. That might have been the case.

KING: And Linda shares that suspicion with you?

KATZ: You will have to ask Linda, but I think that she's on the line. She can speak up.

KING: Linda didn't want to say -- Linda, do you still share that suspicion?

LINDA ZAMSKY, CHANDRA LEVY'S AUNT: I think that he has information that he's still withholding. And the people that surround him in his office, as well, are withholding information. At least from our family, and our lawyer, and our investigators. Whether they have talked to the police and the FBI, we don't know because the police and the FBI don't tell our family or our lawyer or our investigators anything.

KING: Do both of you, Paul and Linda, fear the worst?

KATZ: To tell you the truth, yes, I'm concerned that the outcome is not going to be a positive one.

KING: Linda?

ZAMSKY: I have to remain optimistic for Bob and Susie. I am their strength and I'm their hope and I just have to think positive thoughts.

KING: Are you discouraged, Linda, that the police are apparently just winding down the search here, only got to put two people on it after this week?

ZAMSKY: Absolutely. But maybe the FBI is working on it, and again, we don't know that.

KING: It could also...

ZAMSKY: What we need as a family, Larry, is answers.

KING: I will tell you what, do you two want to stay on the phone awhile?

KATZ: Sure.

KING: All right, stay there, Linda and Paul and we will bring in our panel and I'll come back to you and get your thoughts as our panel discusses it.

Barbara, what do you make of what Paul and Linda have to say about all of this?

BARBARA OLSON, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, you know, there have been reports that Gary Condit has been accounted for those two days, and there have been reports that they are winding down. Looking elsewhere. However, something that they just said, struck accord, when they said, that they're not -- that the police is, is not telling the family the information.

Which gives me thought that they've got some information. They are following leads, they want to make sure whomever those leads are on, whether it's Gary Condit, someone close to him, someone else that knew Chandra that they are following. I think that they closed down talking to the family, I am going to be optimistic and hope that they actually have some leads and some information, that they are following.

KING: Cynthia, can you buy that theory? If the people are not on the family -- maybe they -- don't have to tell us?

CYNTHIA ALKSNE, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: No, and in this media culture, it makes sense especially in the minister was threatened, I would be interested to know from Mr. Katz, whether he told the police about that threat. And whether he knows if the police are following up.

KING: Paul, did he report it?

KATZ: Yes, it was reported.

KING: Does he know if they're following up on it or not?

KATZ: It was reported to the FBI.

KING: It was.

ALKSNE: Good.

KATZ: It was.

ALKSNE: That means that is one more aspect of the investigation, which has evidently been out there for a long time, and we haven't known in the media. That's a good sign for the investigation.

KING: Isn't that a good hope for them, Julian, that maybe if not saying anything, the police know more than we know?

JULIAN EPSTEIN (D), FORMER COUNSEL, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, I think so. I think that actually the police have come under a lot of criticism here. I share a lot of the criticism for the police, I think they were very slow in getting off the dime. I think the fact they didn't get the videotape out of Chandra's building, I think they have been very slow in a lot of other accounts.

But the problem I think has been frankly, Larry, and this careens into the other discussions in other areas is that, the fact that the police keep leaking the material publicly about these interviews, I think is destructive to the investigation. Because I think one thing, you know, I think that one of the unfortunate things about the media coverage so far is that you are either in the Condit -- you are a either a Condit defender or a Condit attacker. The media promotes this dichotomous view of the world.

I am neither. I think that he has made some real bad mistakes here, but I think as Barbara said, the evidence really seems to be pointing away from him right now. The police I think have come out I think today and said the timeline between May 1st and May 2nd is that he was fully accounted for during the whole period of time. He's done the lie detector test, he's done all the other things that we've spoken about.

I think to the extent that the investigation is attempting to derive information from other alleged relationships to the extent that that's made public, I think that that's part of the reason why Mr. Condit has been reluctant to -- to engage in discussions that actually reveal things. I think that what he has been doing is trying to keep private or keep undisclosed these extramarital affairs.

I think that -- where I agree with your callers, and what I've said before on the program, is that the family through Billy Martin has made a request through Mr. Condit that he account to them. And I think that the police and Mr. Condit have to find ways so that they can be satisfied, and again, when you look at things in -- whatever week this is -- whether this is week 12 or week 13, all of the signs now seem to be pointing away from Mr. Condit, notwithstanding the fact that I think he did misbehave in the first few weeks....

KING: We will hold Paul Katz and Linda on the phone and get their thoughts on what's been said, we'll bring in Mark Geragos and Lisa Depaulo as well. We'll be right back after this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUSAN LEVY, CHANDRA'S MOTHER: I am not giving up. But my heart aches and our heart aches and this is very hard. It's very hard. Every day is very hard and we just want -- if anyone's out there and has our daughter -- please reconsider, let her go. Let her come home to us. Take care.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ASSISTANT CHIEF TERRANCE GAINER, D.C. METROPOLITAN POLICE: You have to understand, that we've gathered a lot of information in this. A lot of electronic information, telephone records, banking records and nothing has led us to Chandra Levy. And I really think that it's important to point out that the congressman, although interesting to a lot of people, is not the central figure in this, nor is his wife.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: So, Lisa Depaulo -- and we'll go back to Paul and Linda in just a moment. Who is, if it's not the congressman, Lisa?

LISA DEPAULO, "TALK" MAGAZINE: I hope that this is a strategy, this sense of hopelessness and -- we have covered all of the basis that's coming out of the Washington -- and not a reality.

And I just think that, you know, Paul and Linda, this family has been so stoic in their grief, and might I add, instrumental to the investigation. If -- it was after Aunt Linda that came forward of what she knew that she told the police from day one, that Condit finally fessed up. The gig was up. Yeah, we had an affair. Crucial pieces of information.

KING: By the way, Linda, I don't think we've ever heard your voice. We appreciate you coming on with Paul. Both of you are very on top of things. Were you are shocked, Linda, at all of the attention that your statements got?

ZAMSKY: I -- I guess so, yeah.

KING: Were you surprised...

ZAMSKY: Shocked by the attention from whom? From the media or...

KING: From everybody. You came forward -- where you shocked at first that no-one had mentioned this before to the police?

ZAMSKY: Yeah.

KING: I mean, you couldn't have been the only one who knew this.

ZAMSKY: Yes, but supposedly I was the only one who mentioned it to the police. At least that's what I was told.

KING: And when you spoke to them, were they receptive to you?

ZAMSKY: Yes. Oh, yes. I mean I was asked from -- I spoke to them on the phone on a Monday. And on Tuesday they asked me to come to Washington to give a statement. So, they were quite anxious to hear what I had to say.

KING: Mark Geragos, do you feel -- obviously, Paul and Linda have done the right things.

MARK GERAGOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Anybody who is involved in something like this have got to cooperate and tell the police, tell them what they know and go from there, especially if it's the family members.

KING: Could the police be thinking this out?

GERAGOS: No, I don't think so, and I will tell you why. The last thing in the world you want, if you are a prosecutor is to have your lead investigators out there, making public pronouncements saying, no, this is not the guy. He's not a suspect. We're moving away from him. Blah, blah, blah. There's no way in the world that the U.S. Attorneys who are active on this case are allowing the prosecutors out there to basically tell the potential jury pool, this guy has nothing to do with it. It's just not -- there's no way in the world that they are that sophisticated that they are doing some kind of a bait and switch here, in order to let him get his guard down or anything else. So I have to tell you that you have to take the police at this point at their word that the investigation has moved away from Gary Condit.

KING: Paul, are you disheartened by that, or are you just looking for the solutions?

(CROSSTALK)

KATZ: ...after all, listen, if the man didn't come forward on the first three interviews and clearly they must have asked the questions to Mr. Condit to describe his relationship with Chandra, and he was -- based on what Linda had told the police, I am certainly sure they were quite forward and saying and asking, had they had a relationship, and he clearly must have not been honest and forthcoming to them.

You know, and to me, in my mind's eye, I mean, how much more do you need? It isn't just a matter of being embarrassed that you are caught in an affair. There must be something more that the man is trying to hide. This man has been in a number of affairs, so what's being -- what's the big deal about this one?

KING: Paul -- hold on a second, Julian. Paul, something about the keys bothers you, too.

KATZ: Oh, yes. We know and the police know that Chandra had keys to the congressman's apartment, and isn't it interesting is that the only thing that is missing from Chandra's apartment besides Chandra is her keys.

KING: What do we read into that, Cynthia? -- hold on, Julian.

ALKSNE: What we read into it is that when she left her apartment, she was going somewhere with somebody she was comfortable with, and she took her keys with her. I don't think you can make the next leap, but it is interesting, if you think about it in terms of the timeline.

Here she has this relationship with the congressman. They speak all of the time and they are at the point that she has the keys to his apartment. She disappears on April 30th, and it's her family who reports her missing to the police. I don't know if the congressman tried to reach her during that time. It's sort of a question that's kind of out there. Did the congressman try to reach her? And if he didn't, why didn't he try to reach her?

EPSTEIN: Well, just to pick up on what Cynthia said. There was a lot of speculation last week that during the last three weeks before she disappeared that there was a tumultuous series of phone calls going back between Gary Condit and Chandra Levy and that their relationship was in some type of crisis state.

Well, what we learned I think over the weekend is that the police looked at the police logs and did the checks on it and found that actually between April 12th and April 30th, there was very, very little contact going on, which dispels the theory that the relationship kind of hit a really a tumultuous period of time.

And secondly, the other point if I just could Larry, just to say both to Paul and his wife, is that, you know, we're now into about week 13 of this thing, and there isn't a single bit of evidence that suggests of what Gary Condit was trying to do was to simply not make public, this extramarital affair, and perhaps others. All of the evidence seems to be pointing the other way.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: Hold on! Julian, let Linda respond.

ZAMSKY: Julian.

EPSTEIN: Yeah?

ZAMSKY: Then why didn't he tell the family? We weren't asking him to come out and tell the whole world, we were asking him to tell our family.

EPSTEIN: I agree and he should have. I agree with you, Linda. I agreed that he should have done that. But I think what he has been fearful of is making this affair public and making perhaps the other alleged affairs public.

I don't think that you should confuse his desire to do that, and I think that was improper and I agree with you, with necessarily saying there's a lot of running room between that and saying that the man is guilty or is involved with the disappearance, particularly when all of the evidence at this time.

He has the alibi for all of his schedule on May 1st and May 2nd and the lie detector test. The so-called blood test and the blood in the apartment turned out to be not blood at all, nothing that was incriminating. None of the theories that people thought were going to lend to incriminating evidence about them have worn themselves out at this point.

KING: Hold on, I want to have Linda respond, and then we'll have the whole panel in. We'll be right back. I have to get a break. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. ROBERT LEVY, CHANDRA LEVY'S FATHER: I would like them to look at everything. I don't know that they have. Certainly, you know, doing things 12 weeks later. I'm not sure we could have gotten the same facts you would have gotten early on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) KING: We're back. There you see a picture, by the way, of Paul Katz and there is the lovely Linda Zamsky. It's nice to see her face. She's on the phone with us.

Now, Linda, you wanted to respond to something Julian said.

ZAMSKY: Yeah, we are -- we aren't blaming Gary Condit. We don't -- I mean, no one's guilty until -- I mean, no one -- everyone is innocent until proven guilty. OK? It just seems like there are things that have been going on that he hasn't been honest with. I mean, things -- he has an alibi, it seems, for everything. OK? He goes out, he gets his own lie detector test. They go in, they do a forensic in his apartment in three or four hours. And as people have said on your show, the average investigation in someone's home takes between six and 11 hours.

It seems like everything has been done within his parameters and his way, not the legal way, not the way the police would come in and do it in any of our homes. And that's the problem. That's what makes us all scared, and -- you're shaking your head no.

GERAGOS: Well, it's only -- Linda, I've just got to tell you, in terms of when you say the legal way, I appreciate your frustration. If I were in your position, I'd be the most frustrated man on Earth.

KING: It's her niece, Mark.

GERAGOS: The problem is -- the problem is that from a legal standpoint he hasn't had to do anything, and he has.

KING: And we know all that, but she's talking from a moral...

GERAGOS: From a moral standpoint and from talking to the family, and you just -- and part of this idea that the police haven't talked to her has got to be incredibly frustrating. But the police have to do what they think is appropriate in this investigation, and if they think that too much attention has been paid to the Gary Condit track and not enough to where they think there is some legitimate leads, you have to be supportive in their roll.

ZAMSKY: OK.

ALKSNE: And also -- and hear you tell us that this minister was threatened because it all came out in the press who he was, maybe it's in the best interest of the case that nobody knows what's going on so that nobody is bothered and the police can go about doing their work. And the police officers that are assigned out are really top-flight police officers and so is the FBI agent, and they've had big successes in tough cases in D.C. It's just going to take some time. It's going to take grunt and a little luck.

KING: But you can understand Paul and Linda's frustration.

ALKSNE: Oh, sure. Absolutely.

OLSON: You know, Larry, we also... KING: Linda, I'm sorry. Go ahead.

OLSON: Oh, it's Barbara. I was talking.

KING: Oh, I'm sorry, Barbara and then Linda. Go ahead, Barbara.

OLSON: I was just saying we also have too many people frightened. I mean, you know, the minister was frightened, and I think he truly was, because, of course, he talked to Chandra's parents back before she was missing. There wasn't really a reason, and you don't think a Pentecostal minister is going to exactly come out about that kind of information about their daughter -- it's rather embarrassing -- unless it's something he felt he could help them. And then Anne Marie Smith -- you remember on your show how frightened she was, the guard she had around her.

Too many people have been frightened, and just tonight, Paul and Linda have told us that Chandra confronted Gary and calls her mother back just two weeks before she disappears. And remember, this is a man who was, by all the other women -- which is this is an instance where the other women have given us information -- all the other women talked about how much he guarded secrecy, how much he told them. It's over if you tell anyone.

And Chandra supposedly had been told that, and now we know two weeks before she disappears she had confronted him about another woman and told her mother it's OK. I wonder if it really was.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: Linda, honestly, Linda, Linda -- hold it. Linda, did Chandra ever sound frightened to you?

ZAMSKY: No.

KING: Was she very much in love with him?

ZAMSKY: Yes.

KING: Was she expectant of a future?

ZAMSKY: Yes.

KING: Those are key questions. Let me get -- I've to get another quick break and then take us down to the bottom of the hour. We'll be right back. Paul and Linda on the phone, Paul Katz and Linda Zamsky. They are married, and they are the uncle and aunt of Chandra. And with us are Barbara Olson, Mark Geragos, Cynthia Alksne, Julian Epstein and Lisa DePaulo. We'll get Lisa's thoughts and the rest of the panel's as we go on. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Linda Zamsky on the phone with us. And this can certainly help in this. Anything, any information helps. Was she expecting him like to leave his wife? What -- what was the conversation about when she talked about him to you?

ZAMSKY: She was expecting -- she was going to wait a few years, five years for him -- the inner relationship that was going to be kept quiet, and then eventually, you know, go out and be with him after five years. There was always something about five years.

KING: Really?

ZAMSKY: Yeah.

KING: What advice did you give her?

ZAMSKY: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) tell me what.

KING: What did you say to her?

ZAMSKY: In response to that?

KING: Yeah.

ZAMSKY: Be careful. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. You know, listen, he's a married man. And you know -- you know, on one hand, I gave her advice to get away, to leave, not to stay in this relationship. And then I couldn't push her too far, because then she would stop talking to me and sharing with me, and obviously, she needed to share with someone that she could trust. And obviously, she knew she could trust me.

So, that is how, you know -- I've heard a lot of about, well, Linda has been -- you know, why didn't Linda do this and give her advice like an adult would give? And I gave her advice. But you know, you can't -- if you want somebody to be able to share secrets with them, they have to be able to trust that you're just going to listen and not respond, and that's what I did.

KING: And her parents didn't know?

ZAMSKY: Her -- I can't answer that.

KING: So you...

ZAMSKY: They know. Susie knew.

KATZ: Susan knew.

ZAMSKY: She knew and so did Bob.

DEPAULO: At the end.

ZAMSKY: But they didn't know who the person was. They knew it was a congressman, they knew he was married and they knew he was older. That's all they knew.

KING: Is this -- was this a shock to you when you heard it, Linda, from Chandra the first time?

ZAMSKY: That she was dating someone older?

KING: Yeah, and married.

ZAMSKY: Married, yeah. Married is -- that's tough. I mean, you know, but older, no, because Chandra was a very, very mature, independent individual. She is a very independent individual. So I -- it didn't surprise me that she was in love or having a relationship with someone that was much older than her.

KING: And this sort of frustration you have is with the police as well, right? I mean, you feel like nothing's happened?

ZAMSKY: Oh, I think things have happened. I'm not saying that the police or the FBI or anyone isn't doing something or anything. I think that they're just not telling the family.

I talked to my sister-in-law, I talked to my brother-in-law, they are devastated. I see them on TV. These -- this is my family. I see what's happening to them. I'm not feeling their pain. I'm sharing it.

And I just, I think they need answers. I don't need answers. But Bob and Sue need answers as to what's going on. And whether it be good or bad, this not knowing -- every day they, every night they go to sleep with hope that their daughter's going to be found, and then they wake up the next morning and realize she's still missing, and it's one more day that she's missing. And that's tough.

KING: We'll be...

ZAMSKY: For anybody.

KING: We'll be right back. I'm going to reintroduce everyone. We certainly thank Paul and Linda for giving us this time. We'll bring them back, too.

Don't forget it's time to log on to my King's quiz, cnn.com/larryking. We'll be right back, reintroduce the whole panel. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back, and let's reintroduce our panel. Barbara Olson, the former prosecutor and best-selling author. She's in Washington. In Los Angeles, Mark Geragos, defense attorney. In Los Angeles, Cynthia Alksne, the former federal prosecutor. In Washington, Julian Epstein, the former chief minority counsel at House Judiciary. By the way, worked with Gary Condit on that staff of that committee. And in New York...

EPSTEIN: On government operations, Larry. It was on a different committee. It was on the government operations committee some years ago.

KING: OK, not that committee. And Lisa DePaulo, the contributing writer for "Talk" magazine. She's been investigating this story since it broke. Her article will hit the newsstands this Friday. And with us on the phone is Paul Katz, and his wife, Linda Zamsky. And Linda was, of course, the woman who released that information to "The Washington Post" and to the police about her daughter -- her niece's involvement with the congressman.

A couple of more questions, Linda, just for you, and then I'm swinging the whole panel back in, and you and Paul can jump in.

When -- when she said, I have some big news, what do you think that that meant?

ZAMSKY: I don't know. I have no idea. It could have meant she was going back to California and going to meet up with him. She was getting a new job. I can -- I can speculate just like everybody else. Maybe she was pregnant. I don't think that was the case, though. But -- because she was very conscientious about, you know, her health. And...

KING: Do you think she would have told you that, too?

ZAMSKY: Oh, yeah, absolutely.

KING: Did she sound happy?

ZAMSKY: Yes. She sounded very happy, not sad, not depressed. It was very -- I mean, not very happy. She just sounded like Chandra.

KING: Did you report...

ZAMSKY: You know, and Chandra always sounded relatively happy, you know.

KING: Was she ever worried about people stalking her or...

ZAMSKY: Not to my knowledge.

KING: Not -- what about -- did she have a lot of friends at work? We talked -- someone called in from the building, who said that she didn't make a lot of friends in the building, she kept to herself.

ZAMSKY: I don't know what kind of friends Chandra had in Washington. I know that in January -- December or January, a lot of the interns had gone back home. One was Jennifer Baker. Another one or two gals that she mentioned -- that they had gone back to wherever they came from. So I know a lot of her friends had gone.

But you know, she works -- she worked full-time. She exercised. She kept herself busy. So you know, how do you -- how do you have time for a lot of friends when you just move into Washington in October or September, whenever it was she got there, and make that many friends that quickly, you know?

KING: And she liked it there, right? ZAMSKY: Yes, to my knowledge.

KING: Did she talk to you a lot, Paul?

KATZ: Chandra didn't talk much with me. I've been busy at work and would confide those kinds of things with Linda. We were, you know, platonic and friendly and all that. And of course, we were very close from the perspective that, you know, she is my only niece, and you know, I feel -- I feel as close as Chandra as I have to my own children.

KING: Are you a physician?

KATZ: Yes, I am.

KING: What -- specializing in what?

KATZ: I'm a family practice doc.

KING: And Dr. Levy is oncology, right?

KATZ: He's an oncologist, right.

KING: OK. Lisa DePaulo, from what you've heard so far, does this read a little further into it? Linda is obviously, and Paul, are two very sincere people here.

DEPAULO: And you know, it just strikes me just how fortunate it is that Chandra did confide in her Aunt Linda, because without this knowledge, you know, we would only have his version of the "friendship." And I also think, you know, when you look back on what advice did they give, Mrs. Levy, Linda, you know, you have to, we have to remember that the people who loved Chandra, their biggest fear was that she'd have her heart broken, not that she'd disappear.

KING: Good point.

ALKSNE: You know, I'm wondering from them where -- did she ever talk about going places with him? Did they ever go to West Virginia? Did they ever to Shenandoah? Did they ever go to the Eastern Shore?

KING: That's a good question. Did they travel together to your knowledge, Linda?

ZAMSKY: No, but she talked about going to in California, Palm Springs. She talked about that they were going to take a vacation to Palm Springs.

DEPAULO: You know, that's a great point, too.

ALKSNE: Any place local? Any place local there in the Washington area? Did they ever go anywhere?

ZAMSKY: No, not that she ever mentioned to me.

KING: All right. Who wanted to say something? Was that Lisa or Barbara?

DEPAULO: Yeah, I think think the travel thing is interesting, because one of the questions I always had was, was Chandra packing to go directly to Modesto or to have some kind of rendezvous with him first, because she did tell Linda it will be another 10 days before I get home. And she was looking at travel sites. You know, he may have said, you know, we're going to spend a few days together.

OLSON: And one of the travel sites was Gofrance. I mean, I just wonder...

DEPAULO: That's right.

OLSON: ... if there were other areas. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) looking at lots of travel sites, and she was excited.

DEPAULO: Yeah, and she loved Paris. She loved Paris. She had been to Paris before. She knew Paris.

EPSTEIN: You know, Larry, listen to what we're talking about. I mean, were they going at some point talking about maybe making a trip, and according to what Linda is saying on the phone, they never did travel together.

I mean, I think Linda is saying something that's very important here, and I think that she and Paul have acted really very commendably through the entirety of this investigation, which is that Mr. Condit failed to give the proper accounting to the family, failed to assuage their concerns and their grief by persuading them, convincing them that he was telling them everything that he knew. I don't hear Linda saying or contradicting what the police are saying, which is not only has Mr. Condit cooperated with the police now, not withstanding his initial missteps, which I don't defend. And I don't hear Linda contradicting that at all. I don't hear Linda contradicting what the police are clearly saying, which is the dogs now are kind of aimed at all other -- at many other leads, certainly not the Condit lead.

And there is I think what is becoming now a litany of things which appear to be exculpatory. I know people don't like the lie detector test. I have my problems with the lie detector test as well. But there's no physical evidence. Nobody has really even speculated on any type of motive. Nobody has really speculated -- remember, he doesn't have a car. Nobody's speculated on any means that he could have used. I hardly doubt...

DEPAULO: You have so many facts wrong.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah.

EPSTEIN: Well, which ones? Which ones?

DEPAULO: You have a lot of facts wrong.

EPSTEIN: Which ones, Lisa?

KATZ: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) I'd like... KING: All right, Paul, go ahead. Paul, go ahead.

KATZ: If I could say something here. Throughout this whole thing, there has been a humor, if you will, of intimidation. It started first with, you know, with actually some of the prior women that Mr. Condit had an affair with, an intimidation, even of Chandra, that she should conduct herself in a certain manner or she would lose this relationship she had. An intimidation of both the Thomas -- apparently from some source, we don't know who, we can't necessarily link it to Mr. Condit -- and an intimidation of Jennifer Baker also. That hasn't been mentioned.

Jennifer Baker sat in the home of my sister and with Bob, and told us clearly in no uncertain terms that had there not been a public view to her, that her response in public would have been different. She was his intern, confided in how she was intimidated. By Mr. Condit's, one of Mr. Condit's aides, was intimidated personally and felt that her future, her job would be at risk if she was to really reveal how she personally felt about what was going on there. And you know, she can say whatever she'll say in public, but we know what she said to us in private.

KING: I'll go right to Mark Geragos, and time's flying. We'll be right back. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back. Mark Geragos...

GERAGOS: I was going to just ask Dr. Katz and Linda, if I could. When you've talked to the -- I assume you've talked to the police on at least one occasion, or more than one?

ZAMSKY: Yes.

GERAGOS: And when you've talked to them, have they asked you about other people or other friends or other kinds of things other than the congressman as well?

ZAMSKY: Absolutely.

GERAGOS: And did they spend a lot of time on that and seem to be interested in that?

ZAMSKY: They didn't -- I can't -- I mean, to balance it like equal to what time they spent with Gary versus other people...

GERAGOS: That's what I mean. If you were to estimate the amount of time they spent talking about the congressman with you, and the amount of time they spent talking about everybody else, was it a fairly even 50/50, or did it slant more towards other people?

ZAMSKY: No, it wasn't -- I mean, they didn't do a lot of questioning, to be perfectly honest with you. When I gave my statement, they crossed one -- I gave my statement to one detective, then the other guy came in and he kind of asked the same questions, but in a different format. And then that was it. They didn't...

GERAGOS: They didn't follow up at all with it and ask you about other things, or did you talk to her -- your statement was the one that you released -- I guess, what, to "The Washington Post"?

ZAMSKY: Yes.

GERAGOS: OK. Did they ask you about what other conversations did you have with her, or what other friends did you know about and things of that nature?

ZAMSKY: Yes.

GERAGOS: OK, and you told them all of that. And did they seem interested in that?

ZAMSKY: I don't know. I can't tell you whether they seemed interested. They were -- I don't know whether -- I mean, they were just gathering information.

KING: In other words, they were...

ZAMSKY: They weren't expressing an interest in more Gary than more John or Mary or Sue. You know, it was just -- taking in the information is what they were doing.

KING: Barbara Olson, we've asked this before. Does this it get curiouser? In other words, does it keep mounting on poor Gary?

OLSON: Well, it gets more unanswered questions. I mean, tonight we've now opened even more unanswered questions. It stays that way, and it seems like week by week you would think that you could exclude them. And I disagree with Julian. I don't thin all the evidence is conclusive about Mr. Condit. I think we have a lot of unanswered questions. We wish we had them.

And one thing that stuck in my mind, if I may, is that, you know, Chandra -- we all talk about she left the apartment with just her keys. Is she someone who normally carried a purse? I know there are people who do, who don't, who maybe put things in their pocket. When she came over, did she normally have a purse?

EPSTEIN: Well, you know, Barbara and I -- maybe we don't necessarily disagree. I didn't say that every question had been answered. What I had was that now, 13 weeks into this investigation, a lot of buildup about polygraphs and searches of apartments, and time lines -- everyone said that he couldn't account for all of his time. Now he can.

Every single one of these things has apparently turned out in Mr. Condit's favor. I'm not saying that every question is answered, but what I am saying is this, now three months into this, almost, we still don't have any physical or circumstantial evidence, which, in any way implicates Mr. Condit. So I think that we're veering on the side of this becoming a little bit like, you know, the Richard Jewel. OLSON: Julian, we're counting for his time with people that we have questions about. We have questions about the staff now, because of what happened with their telephone calls. We have questions about his wife, because of a lot of unanswered things and the way she reacted.

(CROSSTALK)

GERAGOS: The police have specifically said that they do not have questions for his wife. They don't have anything further for Mrs. Condit. For you to just put that out there as if that's fact, it's so disingenuous.

OLSON: They're not seeking a reinterview...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: One at a time.

EPSTEIN: To Lisa and to Barbara, who say that what we're saying is not absolutely correct. I think that, look, there is -- due process applies in the courts, not in the media. First Amendment certainly applies here, but I think that we could borrow some of the due process concepts that apply in the legal system to our public debate about this on television. I think that at some point you have to say...

KING: Remember, Julian...

EPSTEIN: I think a at some point you have to say, Larry, that if people want to continue by innuendo implicating of Mr. Condit, then people should say that there's more evidence, other than the fact that he was simply trying to keep private his...

KING: I've got to get a break.

EPSTEIN: And I don't believe anybody's done that yet.

KING: But as long as he stays quiet, he feeds the frenzy.

OLSON: Correct.

KING: All right, let me get a break and we'll come right back. We'll get more from Linda and Paul. We only have a few minutes left. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Linda, there's no -- we can just empathize of what it's like to have someone missing. The not knowing is the worst, isn't it?

ZAMSKY: Yes.

KING: Paul, for you too?

KATZ: Yes, absolutely. KING: The lack of knowledge is the worst thing?

KATZ: Yes. It would be better to know for a fact one way or the another, so one can reconstruct their life and get on with living, and the process of being contributory to what we do on a daily basis. Bob has been totally incapacitated, as far as his professional life is concerned because of this. And frankly, our lives are just totally consumed with this tragedy right now.

KING: Linda, frankly, what are your thoughts about Gary Condit?

KATZ: What are my thoughts?

KING: No, Linda first, and then you, Paul. What do you think? What do you feel?

ZAMSKY: What do I feel? Oh, I don't want to tell you what I feel. I will tell you what I think -- it's probably a little wiser. I think Gary Condit has not been honest with our family. And I am angry at him for that. I am angry at him for pursuing a 24-year-old young girl, and he should know better.

And if this was his daughter, how would he feel? If this was happening to him, what would he be doing? And I -- and addressing the media as well. He hasn't said one word to the media. And does that make him guilty? Does that make him not guilty? I'm not a judge, I can't tell you that, and I don't have an opinion on that.

But I just ask him the question, call me and tell me, how you would feel if this was your daughter, who's about the same age as Chandra. What would you be doing? What would you expect Congressman whoever, Congressman Linda Katz or Linda Zamsky, what would you expect me to do. Would you want the same behavior he's giving to our family. Would he like that given to his?

KING: Paul, what are your thoughts?

KATZ: My thoughts are from what they were from the beginning. I asked from the time they met the sheriff out there in Modesto County, to the police department in Metro Washington to the FBI agent, I said, how can we, the family, be sure that an investigation would be done in arm's length, that this would be handled as if it were any other ordinary citizen involved?

And, you know, I -- I get comments back about how people would refuse themselves if they thought that their personal relationships with this man would interfere with their job or their process of what they're supposed to do in the positions that they hold.

KING: What do you think about him?

KATZ: What do I think about the congressman?

KING: Gary, yeah?

KATZ: Well, he's obviously a good congressman for his constituents. He's probably done a pretty good job for that district. But as a person, as a human being, he sure falls short of what I would hope, you know, another human being would be, in terms of just expecting -- in respect to other person.

KING: Paul and Linda, thank you very much.

KATZ: OK.

KING: Thank you, Linda.

ZAMSKY: You are welcome.

KING: Stay close. Linda Zamsky and her husband Paul Katz. I believe that that's the first time that Linda has been on the media. I don't think I've heard her voice before.

We'll get comments from each of our panelists in our remaining moments after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: You can now log on to my Web site at cnn.com/larry king for the answer to King's Quiz.

OK, a few minutes left. Barbara Olson, this was quite a night. Any closing comment?

OLSON: As we said earlier, we have more questions than answers. I think that the same thing holds, it would be nice if Gary Condit would come forward and tell us, why, the last time he saw Chandra Levy was questioned about it, supposedly, he didn't remember if they were intimate. Why he talked to Anne Marie Smith and said on May 6th, a week after Chandra disappeared, that he might have to disappear for a while.

All of these things are still unanswered. I would like to know the answers to that. I'd like to know if the police are really trying to have their investigation quiet, and what leads they have? Because this woman didn't disappear in thin air. Someone saw her and there's a reward of over $200,000 now and I hope that someone comes forward.

KING: Mark?

GERAGOS: Well, I think that the only conclusion that you can draw at this point, the police have interviewed him, they brought in the FBI who have done the profile. At this point, all roads lead away from Gary Condit.

KING: All roads lead away.

GERAGOS: All roads lead away from Gary Condit.

ALKSNE: There he goes, smoking those cigarettes with no labels.

GERAGOS: I am telling you, there is no way...they don't have any -- at this point, the police have absolutely no interest in pursuing that. It's just not something that they are interested in.

ALKSNE: I don't think that that's right. I believe strongly what they are doing is taking the investigation to a new phase...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: A phase that they are not telling us about.

ALKSNE: Of course, that's what they should do. And they have completed their search of Rock Creek Park.

KING: Lisa, what do you think?

DEPAULO: Yes, I would like to just correct one of the misstated facts tonight from Julian on the phone records: on Friday afternoon, Dr. and Mrs. Levy made a public statement that they know that the last several calls Chandra received were from Congressman Condit.

EPSTEIN: That's not what I said, Lisa.

(CROSSTALK)

DEPAULO: Let me finish the sentence, Julian, and that is quite different from what Congressman Condit told police that the last he spoke to her was Sunday the 29. That is just one of the many discrepancies that are still out there.

EPSTEIN: Lisa, if you are going to correct me, make it accurate. That's not what I said. What I said was, there had been speculation for many weeks that during the last three weeks that there were flurries of phone calls coming on during that time.

(CROSSTALK)

EPSTEIN: Yes, during the last -- during the last couple of days...

KING: Julian, we are running out of time.

EPSTEIN: Not on the scale...

(CROSSTALK)

DEPAULO: Great.

KING: I promise we haven't heard the last. Lisa's article comes out this week and certainly want to think the couple, Paul and Linda for contributing, staying with us throughout the entire program. We thank our panel.

Tomorrow night, Julie Andrews will be here. I am Larry King in Los Angeles. From all of our guests, good night.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

 Search   




MARKETS
4:30pm ET, 4/16
144.70
8257.60
3.71
1394.72
10.90
879.91
 














Back to the top