Continued from page 1

The issue came up repeatedly throughout the cross-examination, with Ms. Hawilo asking at one point: “Are you refusing to respond because you think the answer will incriminate you?”

At another point, Ms. Hawilo suggested that Mr. Condit failed to give police the whole truth about his relationship. Police asked him in one interview, “What was the nature of your relationship with Miss Levy?” Mr. Condit responded that he was friends with her. He insisted he gave the full truth to police but declined to answer whether he equated a sexual relationship with friendship.

The judge eventually rubbed his face in frustration and called the attorneys for a bench conference. He never required Mr. Condit to answer the question directly about his relationship with Levy.

Throughout his testimony, Mr. Condit referred to police investigators whom he said were hounding him unfairly and refusing to believe legitimate alibis he provided to them. He constantly referred to the media attention as a “circus” and said investigators were “out of line” when they demanded to interview his wife.

Mr. Condit also became emotional when he described how the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks wiped his name from the headlines. He said 100 reporters were staking out his apartment that morning. After the planes hit, they were all gone.

At the end of his direct testimony, Ms. Haines asked Mr. Condit directly: “Did you murder Chandra Levy?” He responded, “No.” He also responded “No, ma’am” to the question of whether he had anything to do with her disappearance.

Mr. Condit testified that he last saw Levy a week before she disappeared and they discussed whether he could help her make some contacts with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies where she hoped to work. Mr. Condit told her he would help.

“We never had a fight. We never had any cross words,” he said.

Mr. Condit was dressed in a blue oxford shirt and a sport coat, his hair now completely gray.

In the courtroom, taking careful notes on his testimony, was Levy’s mother, Susan Levy, who has been in the courtroom throughout the trial and was fiercely critical of Mr. Condit throughout the investigation.

During Monday’s cross-examination, Ms. Hawilo questioned Mr. Condit’s assertion that he had been fully cooperative. She asked why he invoked the Fifth Amendment in a grand jury interview in April 2002 and suggested that he was worried about incriminating himself.

Mr. Condit testified that he was despondent because he had just lost his primary re-election campaign and he thought the prosecutor “was there to do what he could to try to trick me or cause me pain.”

Mr. Condit left the courthouse, joined by his daughter, and did not answer any questions. Mrs. Levy also declined to comment through her attorney.

This story is based in part on wire service reports.