Visiting judge Víctor Montiglio issued indictments this Wednesday against 17 former agents of the dissolved National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) in the so-called Calle Conferencia case, in a resolution covering crimes committed by the repressive agency between April 2 and September 9, 1976.

The magistrate, who is investigating the repression of the leadership of the Communist Party (PC) during the military dictatorship, indicted members of the DINA's Lautaro Brigade for the kidnappings of the married couple Bernardo Araya Zuleta and María Flores Barraza, which occurred on April 2 of that year.

Among those charged are Pedro Vitternich Jaramillo, Eduardo Cabezas Mardones, Jorge Díaz Radulovich, Guillermo Díaz Ramírez, and Orlando Torrejón Gatica. Another group was accused of the disappearances of Jorge Muñoz (husband of the late PC secretary-general Gladys Marín), Mario Zamorano, Uldarico Donaire, Jaime Donato, Elisa Escobar, Lenin Díaz, Eliana Espinoza, and Marta Ugarte, for events occurring between May 4 and August 9, 1976.

For these events, the judge indicted Eduardo Reyes Lagos, José Ojeda Obando, Juvenal Piña Garrido, Carlos Rinaldi Suárez, Heriberto Acevedo, Emilio Troncoso Vivallos, Claudio Pacheco Fernández, Víctor Álvarez Droguett, José Friz Esparza, Eduardo Garea Guzmán, and Rufino Jaime Astorga.

In the case of Marta Ugarte, three former agents were indicted for the crime of qualified homicide, as her body appeared on Los Molles beach after being thrown from a helicopter to dispose of it. Those affected by the judicial decision were Heriberto Acevedo, Emilio Troncoso Vivallos, and Claudio Pacheco Fernández.

Until now, Montiglio had only maintained indictments against more than 70 DINA agents for the kidnapping of Víctor Díaz, father of the leader of the Association of Relatives of the Forcibly Disappeared (AFDD) Viviana Díaz, so with these indictments, he expands the scope of his investigation.

These pages have been prepared and are maintained by: International Human Rights Project - London © 1996 - 2015

Source: elmostrador.cl, May 30, 2007

Conviction issued against 28 repressive agents of the dictatorship for the crime of Marta Ugarte

The minister in extraordinary visitation for human rights violation cases of the Santiago Court of Appeals, Miguel Vázquez Plaza, issued a first-instance sentence in the investigation into the kidnapping and qualified homicide of the teacher Marta Lidia Ugarte Román, whose body appeared on La Ballena beach, in the Los Molles sector, on September 12, 1976.

In the resolution (case file 2182-1998), Minister Vázquez issued a conviction against the following 28 state agents for their responsibility in the crimes perpetrated between August and September 1976.

The majority of those convicted were agents and leaders of the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA), and the others were members of the Army Aviation Command, the agency responsible for the execution of the so-called "death flights." Carlos José Leonardo López Tapia, former army colonel, head of the Villa Grimaldi torture center at the time of the events, sentenced to 12 years in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of absolute perpetual disqualification from public office and political rights, and absolute disqualification from professional titles for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as the perpetrator of the crime of qualified homicide. Ricardo Víctor Lawrence Mires, former carabineros lieutenant colonel, head of the Águila Group of the DINA's Caupolicán Brigade (currently a fugitive from justice), sentenced to 12 years in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of absolute perpetual disqualification from public office and political rights, and absolute disqualification from professional titles for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as the perpetrator of the crime of qualified homicide. He must also serve 4 years in prison as the perpetrator of the crime of simple kidnapping. Carlos Oscar Gregorio Evaristo Mardones Díaz, former army colonel, head of the aviation command that carried out "the death flights": 8 years in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of absolute perpetual disqualification from public office and political rights, and absolute disqualification from professional titles for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as an accomplice to the crime of qualified homicide. Antonio Palomo Contreras, former army brigadier, and Luis Felipe Polanco Gallardo, former army major, members of the aviation command, both sentenced to 5 years in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of absolute perpetual disqualification from public office and political rights, and absolute disqualification from professional titles for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as accessories after the fact to the crime of qualified homicide. Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, former army brigadier, imprisoned in Punta Peuco for countless other convictions for crimes against humanity, sentenced to 4 years in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of absolute perpetual disqualification from political rights and absolute disqualification from public office for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as the perpetrator of the crime of simple kidnapping. Heriberto del Carmen Acevedo and Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, former carabineros non-commissioned officers, both sentenced to 10 years and one day in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of absolute perpetual disqualification from public office and political rights, and absolute disqualification from professional titles for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as co-perpetrators of the crime of qualified homicide. Additionally, they must serve 2 years in prison as perpetrators of the crime of simple kidnapping. Emilio Hernán Troncoso Vivallos, former carabineros non-commissioned officer, sentenced to 5 years and one day in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of absolute perpetual disqualification from public office and political rights, and absolute disqualification from professional titles for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as co-perpetrator of the crime of qualified homicide. Additionally, one year in prison as perpetrator of the crime of simple kidnapping. For their part, agents Eugenio Jesús Fieldhouse Chávez, Pedro Mora Villanueva, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Juvenal Alfonso Piña Garrido, Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, José Mario Friz Esparza, Pedro Segundo Bitterlich Jaramillo, Orlando del Tránsito Altamirano Sanhueza, Eduardo Patricio Cabezas Mardones, Jorge Iván Díaz Radulovich, Guillermo Eduardo Díaz Ramírez, Orlando Jesús Torrejón Gatica, Carlos Enrique Miranda Mesa, and Carlos Eusebio López Inostroza were sentenced to one year in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of suspension from public office for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as co-perpetrators of the crime of simple kidnapping. Additionally, agents José Javier Soto Torres, Jerónimo del Carmen Neira Méndez, Roberto Hernán Rodríguez Manquel, Leónidas Emiliano Méndez Moreno, and José Domingo Seco Alarcón were sentenced to 61 days in prison, in addition to the legal accessory penalties of suspension from public office for the duration of the sentence; and payment of court costs, as accomplices to the crime of simple kidnapping. Meanwhile, agents Jorge Segundo Madariaga Acevedo, José Nelson Fuentealba Saldías, Hugo Hernán Clavería Leiva, Raúl Alberto Soto Pérez, and Juan Carlos Escobar Valenzuela were acquitted due to lack of participation in the events. During the investigation stage, Minister Vázquez managed to prove the following facts: 1.- That Marta Lidia Ugarte Román was a militant of the Communist Party of Chile and a member of the Central Committee of that group, working in the Party's organization during 1976. 2.- That, as a consequence of the military coup of September 11, 1973, she went into hiding because she was being sought by intelligence services, living with Elvira Solari Ahumada at the address Callejón Lo Ovalle No. 908 in the La Cisterna commune, a place where she had been residing since the aforementioned month of September 1973, for security reasons, given her political militancy. 3.- That, on August 9, 1976, Marta Ugarte Román left the Callejón Lo Ovalle address around 15:00 hours, heading to the office of Dr. Iván Insunza, located on Vicuña Mackenna, to be treated for an infection in her leg resulting from a dog bite, meeting on the way Héctor Acela, now deceased, with whom she walked along Avenida Vicuña Mackenna in the direction of Avenida Matta, who warned her that the area looked strange and seemed to be under surveillance, but she insisted on continuing her path, not knowing that Dr. Iván Insunza had already been detained previously by intelligence services. 4.- That agents of the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA), belonging to the Purén Brigade, whose immediate objective was the tracking, location, and detention of Communist Party militants, proceeded to detain her without any order at the office of Dr. Insunza, who had been detained previously due to his communist affiliation, an office that was being watched by security agencies; she was then taken to the clandestine detention center of said agency, known as Villa Grimaldi or Terranova, where she was kept deprived of liberty, interrogated, and subjected to physical duress, being recognized and identified by other detainees who were in the same place at that time. 5.- That the political authorities of the time, belonging to the Ministry of the Interior and the DINA itself, officially denied the detention of Marta Ugarte Román and any knowledge of her whereabouts. 6.- That, while deprived of liberty, she was taken out to the street by agents in order to identify other militants and supporters of the Communist Party, being seen in one of those operations at a residence on Calle Constitución, in the Santiago commune, a place where party meetings were held. 7.- That, approximately on September 9, 1976, Marta Ugarte Román was transferred along with other detainees from the Villa Grimaldi facility to the town of Peldehue by DINA operational agents, where she was killed, her body covered with a sack and tied with wire around her neck, then loaded onto a Puma helicopter of the Army Aviation Command, whose crew consisted of a pilot, co-pilot, a mechanic crew member, and a DINA operational agent, an aircraft that took off for the coast, heading out to sea, to then throw her body into the high seas from a height. 8.- That, on September 12, 1976, on La Ballena beach, in the town of Los Molles, the body of Marta Lidia Ugarte Román was found lifeless by Marcel Dupré David, presenting only a piece of cloth and a piece of wire tied around her neck, which was severed, and with clear signs of having received physical duress; furthermore, she presented signs of needle marks on her arms. The corpse was taken to the La Ligua hospital and then to the Legal Medical Service of Santiago for the corresponding autopsies. The first report, dated September 14, 1976, concluded a violent death under homicidal circumstances, where the direct cause of death was polytraumatism and spinal luxofracture on September 9, 1976; the second expert report, of October 22, 1976, concluded that the cause of death was thoraco-abdomino-pelvic trauma, the expansion of which on February 22, 2010, determined that the final event that led to her death was asphyxiation by strangulation with wire. 9.- That the Army Aviation Command had its operations center at the Tobalaba airfield, among others, for the flight of Puma helicopters, which had greater flight and transport capacity, for which movement required authorizations from the highest authorities of the Army, since it had to assign at least, in advance, the pilots, co-pilots, and mechanics who were to form the flight crew. These ships were used institutionally and regularly, in conjunction with the DINA, for several years, to dispose of the bodies of people detained in the various detention centers of said agency, who were taken directly to the Tobalaba airfield or taken to the Peldehue Regiment, to then undertake flight to the high seas, where they were thrown into the ocean.

Source: resumen.cl, July 1, 2016

18 former agents of the dictatorship convicted for the murder of teacher Marta Ugarte

"It was sufficiently proven that state agents acted with the precise objective of detaining the victim, without a prior order and exclusively for political reasons, the act being executed on the occasion of a policy of repression and disappearance of a person for their thinking, with the state authority refusing to provide any information about the detention and the destination of that person, which is an attack against the human person," argues the judicial decision.

This Monday, the decision of the Supreme Court was made official, an entity that confirmed the conviction of 18 former agents of the dictatorship for the kidnapping and murder in 1976 of the PC militant teacher, Marta Ugarte Román, after the rejection of the cassation appeals presented against the previous ruling, reports the Judiciary.

In the sentence, the Second Chamber of the highest court ruled out any error of law in the decision that sentenced Ricardo Lawrence Mires, Heriberto del Carmen Acevedo, and Claudio Pacheco Fernández to 15 years in prison as perpetrators of qualified homicide and 10 years in prison as perpetrators of qualified kidnapping.

Regarding Pedro Espinoza Bravo, José Ojeda Obando, Juvenal Piña Garrido, Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, Orlando Altamirano Sanhueza, Guillermo Díaz Ramírez, Jorge Díaz Radulovich, Orlando Torrejón Gatica, Carlos Miranda Mesa, and Carlos López Inostroza, they received a sentence of 10 years in prison as perpetrators of qualified kidnapping.

For his part, Carlos Mardones Díaz was sentenced to eight years in prison as an accomplice, while Luis Polanco Gallardo was sentenced to five years in prison as an accessory after the fact to qualified homicide.

Leónidas Méndez Romero and José Seco Alarcón must serve a sentence of five years in prison as accomplices to qualified kidnapping, and Emilio Troncoso Vivallos was sentenced to four years in prison as an accomplice to qualified kidnapping.

Details of the ruling The sentence ended up ruling out any error of law in the decision that established that Marta Ugarte Román was detained and murdered for political reasons, specifically for her militancy in the Communist Party. "It is the detention of a person and subsequent homicide, whose motivations were of a political nature, for the sole circumstance of belonging to a political conglomerate that had been decided to be combated drastically, by state agents in an organization—the National Intelligence Directorate—that had an entire structure, specifically, for the persecution, location, and detention of members of the Communist Party and, in their case, making them disappear, as they were treated as enemies of the country," argues the court's decision. And it subsequently adds that "it was sufficiently proven that state agents acted with the precise objective of detaining the victim, without a prior order and exclusively for political reasons, the act being executed on the occasion of a policy of repression and disappearance of a person for their thinking, with the state authority refusing to provide any information about the detention and the destination of that person, which is an attack against the human person." In parallel, the national justice system established that the statute of limitations does not apply to reduce the sentence as it is a crime against humanity. The case Regarding the case, the site Memoria Viva details that on August 9, 1976, DINA agents detained Marta Ugarte. According to the account of witnesses, the teacher was detained in Villa Grimaldi, where she subsequently died as a consequence of the torture she received. After the crime, those responsible threw her into the sea, where she was found semi-naked and inside a sack tied to her neck with a wire, on September 9 of that year on La Ballena beach, in Los Molles. The autopsy report confirms that while alive, Ugarte suffered a spinal luxofracture, thoraco-abdominal trauma with multiple rib fractures, rupture and bursting of the liver and spleen, dislocation of both shoulders and hip, and a double fracture in the right forearm. Her date of death corresponds to September 9 of that year.

Source: eldesconcierto.cl, November 29, 2021

Santiago Court confirms ruling that convicted 30 DINA agents for the qualified kidnapping of a pregnant young woman

The appellate court confirmed the sentence convicting 30 agents of the defunct National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) for their responsibility in the crime of aggravated kidnapping of Reinalda del Carmen Pereira Plaza.

A 29-year-old woman, five months pregnant, she was detained on December 15, 1976, in the current commune of Macul and taken to the clandestine detention center located at Calle Simón Bolívar Nº 8800, in the commune of La Reina, from where her trail was lost.

The Santiago Court of Appeals confirmed the sentence convicting 30 agents of the defunct National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) for their responsibility in the crime of aggravated kidnapping of Reinalda del Carmen Pereira Plaza.

A 29-year-old woman, five months pregnant, she was detained on December 15, 1976, in the current commune of Macul and taken to the clandestine detention center located at Calle Simón Bolívar Nº 8800, in the commune of La Reina, from where her trail was lost.

In the ruling (case file 3.023-2019), the Sixth Chamber of the appellate court—composed of justices María Rosa Kittsteiner, María Paula Merino, and Paula Rodríguez—ratified the sentence convicting Pedro Espinoza Bravo, Juan Morales Salgado, and Ricardo Lawrence Mires to 10 years in prison as perpetrators of the crime.

Meanwhile, in their capacity as co-perpetrators, Gladys Calderón Carreño, Juvenal Piña Garrido, Héctor Valdebenito Araya, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Jorge Manríquez Manterola, María Angélica Guerrero Soto, Orfa Saavedra Vásquez, Elisa Magna Astudillo, Heriberto del Carmen Acevedo, Claudio Pacheco Fernández, Emilio Troncoso Vivallos, Teresa Navarro Navarro, José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, Gustavo Guerrero Aguilera, and Jorge Arriagada Mora must serve 7 years in prison.

In the case of José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, José Miguel Meza Serrano, Jorge Iván Díaz Radulovich, Jorge Segundo Pichunmán Curiqueo, Sergio Hernán Castro Andrade, Carlos Enrique Miranda Mesa, Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, Orlando del Tránsito Altamirano Sanhueza, Guillermo Eduardo Díaz Ramírez, Bertha Yolanda del Carmen Jiménez Escobar, Carlos Eusebio López Inostroza, and Joyce Ana Ahumada Despouy, they must serve 4-year sentences as accomplices.

The appellate court adopted the findings that allowed the visiting judge Miguel Vázquez Plaza to establish the responsibility and participation of the then-state agents convicted in the kidnapping and disappearance of the medical technologist.

“That, in this course of action, the reasoning in the reviewed sentence is shared for the purpose of establishing the participation of the convicted parties, insofar as the evidentiary background outlined in the appealed sentence, in the grounds fourteen against Espinoza Bravo, seventeen against Morales Salgado, twenty against Lawrence Mires, twenty-nine against Calderón Carreño, thirty-two against Piña Garrido, forty-one against Valdebenito Araya, forty-four against Escalona Acuña, forty-seven against Manríquez Manterola, sixty-five against Saavedra Vásquez, sixty-eight against Magna Astudillo, seventy-one against Oyarce Riquelme, seventy-four against Acevedo, seventy-seven against Pacheco Fernández, eighty against Troncoso Vivallos, eighty-six against Navarro Navarro, ninety-five against Sarmiento Sotelo, one hundred seven against Guerrero Aguilera, and one hundred twenty-two against Arriagada Mora, constitute a set of judicial presumptions which, given their multiplicity, gravity, precision, and concordance, and for meeting the legal requirements provided for in Article 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, allow for the accreditation of the participation attributed to them as co-perpetrators, in the terms provided for in Article 15 No. 1 of the Penal Code, in accordance with the reasoning in grounds fifteen, eighteen, twenty-one, thirty, thirty-three, forty-two, forty-five, forty-eight, sixty-six, sixty-nine against Magna Astudillo, seventy-two, seventy-five, seventy-seven, eighty-one, eighty-seven, ninety-five, one hundred seven, and one hundred twenty-three respectively, and which is complemented by the reasoning in foundations one hundred seventy-three, one hundred seventy-eight, one hundred eighty-two, one hundred eighty-six, one hundred eighty-nine, one hundred ninety-five, one hundred ninety-seven, two hundred three, two hundred six, and two hundred ten,” it is detailed.

The resolution adds that: “At this point, it should be specified that the participation as a co-perpetrator attributed to Juan Morales Salgado falls fully within the provisions of Article 15 No. 1 of the Penal Code, since he acted under the direct orders of Manuel Contreras and was in charge of the Simón Bolívar barracks at the time of the events, corresponding to him in said capacity to coordinate the operational work of the brigades acting under his command, especially in relation to the dismantling of the Communist Party, assigning personnel under his charge for this purpose, directing investigation efforts and receiving the corresponding reports, ordering the entry and detention of the detainees in the unit, as well as the interrogations and torture to which they were subjected and, where applicable, their death and disappearance, establishing that he was present during the interrogation and torture of the victim in these proceedings, which determines that he intervened in an immediate and direct manner in the events, so his conduct implies a functional contribution to the global result, maintaining, together with the other perpetrators, the co-dominion of the act.”

“For its part, the attribution of responsibility as a co-perpetrator, in the terms provided for in Article 15 No. 1 of the Penal Code, which is imputed to the defendant María Angélica Guerrero Soto, is established by virtue of her confession in accordance with the provisions of Article 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is corroborated by the merit of the background information indicated in foundation fifty-seven of the appealed sentence, to which is added the reasoning in motivation one hundred ninety-three,” the ruling adds.

“That, in the same sense,” it continues, “it adheres to what is indicated in the sentence under study, insofar as the indications pointed out in the grounds thirty-five against Ojeda Obando, fifty against Meza Serrano, fifty-three against Lagos Yáñez, fifty-nine against Díaz Radulovich, sixty-two against Pichunmán Curiqueo, eighty-three against Castro Andrade, ninety-eight against Miranda Mesa, one hundred one against Álvarez Droguett, one hundred four against Altamirano Sanhueza, one hundred thirteen against Díaz Ramírez, one hundred twenty-five against Jiménez Escobar, one hundred thirty-four against López Inostroza, and one hundred forty-three against Ahumada Despouy, gather the necessary force to configure judicial presumptions, which, given their multiplicity, gravity, precision, and concordance, allow for the accreditation of the participation attributed to them as accomplices, in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the Penal Code, according to the reasoning in the foundations thirty-six, fifty-one, fifty-four, sixty, sixty-three, eighty-four, ninety-nine, one hundred two, one hundred five, one hundred fourteen, one hundred twenty-six, one hundred thirty-five, and one hundred forty-four, respectively, to which are added the reasonings one hundred seventy-one, one hundred seventy-nine, one hundred eighty-seven, one hundred ninety-eight, two hundred, two hundred four, and two hundred eight of the ruling.”

For the appellate court, in this case: “(…) as noted, it has been sufficiently demonstrated that all the defendants were part of an organized structure under subordination and dependency, in which those who exercised management duties and operational personnel coexisted, dedicated to both investigation and the detention, custody, interrogation, torture, and, where applicable, death and disappearance of the detainees, in which one observes, on the one hand, the division of roles typical of co-perpetration, since all of them made a functional contribution to the execution of the crime, each of them having co-dominion of the act and, on the other, a facilitation of the means with which the crime is committed, thus cooperating in the act of another, by prior or simultaneous acts, which is what characterizes complicity.”

“With that understanding, contrary to what the defenses point out in court in support of their appeals, it is convenient to specify that the convicted parties are not punished merely for belonging to the institution, but for the conduct displayed by each one in relation to the events that concern the victim of these proceedings, Ms.

Reinalda Pereira Plaza, which also leads to ruling out the intervention of those accused with respect to whom, despite having been established that they were part of the same institution and performed functions in the property located at Simón Bolívar No. 8800 in La Reina, their punishable participation in any of the forms provided for by law has not been proven.” It concludes.

Detention and disappearance

In the appealed ruling, the visiting judge Miguel Vázquez Plaza established the following facts:

• a) That the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA), on an unspecified date, but during the first half of 1976, occupied and enabled a property at Calle Simón Bolívar Nº 8800, in the commune of La Reina, consisting of a country house, which was conditioned for its purpose of confinement. It had a single access gate, a guard booth to its right where gate duty was performed, a house at the back, a small soccer field, parking lots, and on the left side of the property a kind of gymnasium where there was a canteen, kitchen, and some locker rooms and bathrooms, which were conditioned to be used as dungeons, a property in which the Lautaro brigade, under the command of Major Juan Morales Salgado, operated and which was used as a secret and clandestine place of confinement; people were brought to said premises as detainees to be interrogated under the use of various physical coercion techniques, especially regarding those who had or had had political militancy adhering to the Communist Party.
• b) That likewise, in the second half of 1976, the DINA groups under the command of officers Germán Barriga and Ricardo Lawrence moved to said premises, together with their operational agents, who were fundamentally concerned with investigating, locating, raiding, pursuing, repressing, and dismantling the members of the Communist Party, especially its leadership, for which provisional facilities were enabled for their installation; consisting of offices, a gymnasium, and locker rooms that were confinement dungeons, where interrogations and torture were carried out, using coercion with various methods.
• c) That Reinalda del Carmen Pereira Plaza, pregnant with her first child, 5 months into her pregnancy, a medical technologist and communist militant, who worked sheltering people and as a liaison between Eliana Ahumada and Fernando Navarro, although also related to the communist militant Fernando Ortiz, was detained at 29 years of age, at approximately 8:30 PM, while waiting for public transport, by security agents on December 15, 1976, at the corner of Calle Exequiel Fernández and Rodrigo de Araya, in the commune of Ñuñoa, currently the commune of Macul. The agents who detained her were traveling in two Peugeot brand cars; one of them with license plate HLN-55, from which a subject got out who grabbed her violently; upon her screaming for help, a second subject got out with whom she was forcibly subdued and placed inside the vehicle. The detention was carried out in the presence of witnesses who were in the various surrounding commercial establishments, who report that once the victim was subdued and the detention materialized, the car headed along Rodrigo de Araya in a northerly direction.
• d) That Reinalda del Carmen Pereira Plaza was taken to the secret detention center Simón Bolívar, where she was seen together with other prisoners who, in turn, had been detained by the same brigades under the same operational policy between December 13 and 15, 1976; that is, Héctor Véliz Ramírez, Fernando Navarro Allendes, Lincoyán Yalu Berríos Cataldo, Juan Fernando Ortiz Letelier, and Horacio Cepeda Marincovich. In this place, Reinalda was severely beaten, tortured, illegitimately coerced, and then made to disappear, without any news of her whereabouts to this date.
• e) That the Chilean government of the time, given the search efforts carried out by her relatives, reported that the affected person had registered an exit ‘on foot’ through the Chile-Argentina border crossing Los Libertadores, on December 21, 1976, an official version that was judicially established as false, as stated in the process reviewed, case file Rol 2-77, in which it was verified that the route sheet that recorded said circumstances had been falsified.
• f) That the victim in these proceedings was detained on public roads just like thirteen other people in similar circumstances; eleven belonging to the Communist Party and two to the MIR and, where the information provided by the Military Government was similar and erroneous, demonstrating a large-scale operation that obeyed a policy of investigation, persecution, and dismantling of the Communist Party and not an isolated event.
• g) That all the aforementioned persons, including the victim, were detained to be interrogated and tortured by reason of their political militancy and, in order to obtain information about their party activities and the identification of other members of the Communist Party in hiding; coercion that did not cease until the required information was obtained or until the victims became unconscious.

Source: pjud.cl, March 4, 2022

Santiago Court sentences 47 former DINA agents for kidnappings and aggravated homicide in the Conferencia 1 Case

In the ruling (case file 2.545-2019), the Sixth Chamber of the appellate court—composed of justices Graciela Gómez, Andrea Díaz-Muñoz, and justice Matías de la Noi—confirmed the sentence of visiting judge Miguel Vázquez Plaza against the convicted parties, but modified the sentences by changing the participation of some convicted parties from complicity to authorship.

The Court of Appeals sentenced 47 former agents of the dissolved National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) for the aggravated kidnappings of Mario Jaime Zamorano Donoso, Onofre Jorge Muñoz Poutays, Uldarico Donaire Cortez, Jaime Patricio Donato Avendaño, Elisa del Carmen Escobar Cepeda, Lenin Adán Díaz Silva, Víctor Manuel Díaz López, and Eliana Marina Espinoza Fernández, and the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López, victims of the so-called Conferencia 1 case.

In the ruling (case file 2.545-2019), the Sixth Chamber of the appellate court—composed of justices Graciela Gómez, Andrea Díaz-Muñoz, and justice Matías de la Noi—confirmed the sentence of visiting judge Miguel Vázquez Plaza against the convicted parties, but modified the sentences by changing the participation of some convicted parties from complicity to authorship.

The ruling sentences Pedro Espinoza Bravo and Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko to 20 years in prison for their responsibility as authors of aggravated kidnappings.

Meanwhile, Emilio Troncoso Vivallos, Claudio Pacheco Fernández, Jorge Díaz Radulovich, Orlando Altamirano Sanhueza, Eduardo Cabezas Mardones, Guillermo Díaz Ramírez, Orlando Torrejón Gatica, Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, Carlos Miranda Mesa, Carlos López Inostroza, Lionel Medrano Rivas, Juvenal Piña Garrido, José Ojeda Obando, José Seco Alarcón, Roberto Rodríguez Manquel, and Leonidas Méndez Moreno were sentenced to 15 years in prison as authors of aggravated kidnappings.

Meanwhile, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Gladys Calderón Carreño, and Sergio Pichunmán Cariqueo must serve a sentence of 12 years in prison for the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López and a sentence of 5 years and one day in prison for their responsibility in the aggravated kidnapping of the same victim.

Agent Juan Morales Salgado will serve a sentence of 8 years in prison for his responsibility in the aggravated kidnapping of the victim Díaz López.

Agents Jorge Andrade Gómez and Federico Chaigneau Sepúlveda must serve a sentence of 6 years in prison for their responsibility in the aggravated kidnapping of Víctor Díaz López.

Finally, Elisa Magna Astudillo, Orfa Saavedra Vásquez, Celinda Aspe Rojas, Teresa Navarro Navarro, Berta Jiménez Escobar, Jorge Arriagada Mora, Eduardo Oyarce Riquelme, Ana Vilches Muñoz, Italia Vaccarella Gilio, Jorge Manríquez Manterola, Gustavo Guerrero Aguilera, Luis Lagos Yáñez, María Angélica Guerrero Soto, Sergio Castro Andrade, Pedro Gutiérrez Valdés, Joyce Ahumada Despouy, Hiro Álvarez Vega, José Miguel Meza Serrano, Carlos Bermúdez Mendez, Marilin Silva Vergara, Camilo Torres Negrier, and Juan Suazo Saldaña were sentenced to 5 years and one day in prison as authors of the aggravated kidnapping of Víctor Díaz López.

The appellate court's ruling considers, to increase the sentence and change the participation, the following facts:

• “That for the purpose of determining the quantum of the sentence, the following will be kept in mind:
• 1.- That in this case, 8 crimes of aggravated kidnapping have been considered proven, committed against the persons of Mario Jaime Zamorano Donoso, Onofre Jorge Muñoz Poutays, Uldarico Donaire Cortez, Jaime Patricio Donato Avendaño, Elisa del Carmen Escobar Cepeda, Lenin Adán Díaz Silva, Víctor Manuel Díaz López, and Eliana Marina Espinoza Fernández, and the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López.
• 2.- That as authors of the 8 crimes of kidnapping indicated above, Pedro Espinoza Bravo, Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko, Emilio Troncoso Vivallos, Claudio Pacheco Fernández, Jorge Díaz Radulovich, Orlando Altamirano Sanhueza, Eduardo Cabezas Mardones, Guillermo Díaz Ramírez, Orlando Torrejon Gatica, Víctor Manuel Alvarez Droguett, Carlos Miranda Mesa, Carlos López Inostroza, Lionel Medrano Rivas, Juvenal Piña Garrido, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, José Domingo Seco Alarcón, Roberto Rodríguez Manquel, and Leonidas Méndez Moreno will be sanctioned.
• 3.- That in turn, Juan Hernán Morales Salgado, Jorge Andrade Gómez, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Gladys Calderón Carreño, Jorge Pichunman Curiqueo, Nelson Herrera Lagos, Federico Chaigneau Sepúlveda, Elisa Magna Astudillo, Orfa Saavedra Vásquez, Celinda Angélica Aspe Rojas, Teresa Navarro Navarro, Berta Jiménez Escobar, Jorge Arriagada Mora, Eduardo Oyarce Riquelme, Ana Vilches Muñoz, Italia Vaccarella Gilio, José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, Gustavo Guerrero Aguilera, Luis Lagos Yáñez, María Angélica Guerrero Soto, Sergio Castro Andrade, Pedro Gutiérrez Valdés, Joyce Ahumada Despouy, Hiro Alvarez Vega, José Miguel Meza Serrano, Carlos Bermúdez Méndez, Marilin Silva Vergara, Camilo Torres Negrier, and Juan Edmundo Suazo Saldaña will be sentenced as co-authors of the aggravated kidnapping of Víctor Díaz Lopez.
• 4.- That, in addition, the responsibility of Juan Hernán Morales Salgado, Juvenal Piña Garrido, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Gladys Calderón Carreño, and Jorge Pichunman has been established as authors of the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López.
• 5.- That the crime of aggravated kidnapping, at the date of the events, had assigned the penalty of major imprisonment in any of its degrees, while aggravated homicide had that of major imprisonment in its medium to perpetual degree.
• 6.- That all the accused are favored by the mitigating factor of criminal responsibility of their irreproachable prior conduct,” the ruling says.

It adds: “That for the purposes of regulating the sanction applicable to the accused indicated in No. 1 of the preceding ground, for the 8 crimes of aggravated kidnapping established, in the determination of the penalty to be imposed, the provisions of Article 509 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will be applied, regulating a single one for all of them, making the rule of the second paragraph of the cited Article 509 prevail, since it is more favorable than the rule of Article 74 of the Penal Code, and considering any of the kidnappings for the increase of degree due to the reiteration, since all the infractions considered in isolation and with the circumstances of the case, have assigned in the law the same punishment.”

The sentence also reasons: “That, as indicated above, the accused indicated in point 1 of ground 36° benefit from a mitigating factor and are not harmed by aggravating factors, in such a way that in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 68 of the Penal Code, the maximum degree of the penalty indicated in the abstract by the law in each of the kidnapping crimes will not be applied, excluding major imprisonment in its maximum degree.

Subsequently, the entire penal framework will be increased by one degree due to the reiteration, remaining definitively in major imprisonment in its medium to maximum degrees, regulating the specific amount of the custodial sanction that is decided with respect to each one in consideration of the extent of the harm caused by the illicit acts—disappearance of persons for almost forty-seven years—in accordance with the provisions of Article 69 of the Penal Code, and the participation that specifically fell to all the convicted parties in them, attending to their institutional and operational position.

Consequently, with respect to Espinoza Bravo and Krassnoff Martchenko, the sanction to be imposed will be maintained in the quantum established by the first-instance judge, attentive to the roles played by both in the planning and perpetration of the cited crimes, to the entity of the harm caused by such conduct and its graduation at the time, elements that allow for a more energetic reproach to be directed at them, without the consideration of the recognized mitigating factor being able to alter the regulated quantum, given that the criteria enunciated above allow it to be determined in this way.

In relation to Emilio Troncoso Vivallos, Claudio Pacheco Fernández, Jorge Díaz Radulovich, Orlando Altamirano Sanhueza, Eduardo Cabezas Mardones, Guillermo Díaz Ramírez, Orlando Torrejón Gatica, Víctor Manuel Alvarez Droguett, Carlos Miranda Mesa, Carlos López Inostroza, Lionel Medrano Rivas, Juvenal Piña Garrido, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, José Domingo Seco Alarcón, Roberto Rodríguez Manquel, and Leonidas Méndez Moreno, the penalty to be imposed as co-authors of the eight aggravated kidnappings will be regulated in the high part of the lower degree resulting from the increment operation due to the reiteration of crimes, that is, in the segment of major imprisonment in its medium degree, taking into account for this the gravity of the events, the protection and impunity they enjoyed for all the time elapsed since the commission of the illicit acts, their number, and the extent of the harm caused.”

“That in the case of Juan Hernán Morales Salgado, Jorge Andrade Gómez, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Gladys Calderón Carreño, Jorge Pichunman Curiqueo, Nelson Herrera Lagos, Federico Chaigneau Sepúlveda, Elisa Magna Astudillo, Orfa Saavedra Vásquez, Celinda Angélica Aspe Rojas, Teresa Navarro Navarro, Berta Jiménez Escobar, Jorge Arriagada Mora, Eduardo Oyarce Riquelme, Ana Vilches Muñoz, Italia Vaccarella Gilio, José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, Gustavo Guerrero Aguilera, Luis Lagos Yáñez, María Angélica Guerrero Soto, Sergio Castro Andrade, Pedro Gutiérrez Valdés, Joyce Ahumada Despouy, Hiro Alvarez Vega, José Miguel Meza Serrano, Carlos Bermúdez Méndez, Marilin Silva Vergara, Camilo Torres Negrier, and Juan Edmundo Suazo Saldaña, the sanction to be applied as co-authors of the aggravated kidnapping of Víctor Díaz Lopez will also take into consideration the gravity of the crime, the institutional protection that the accused enjoyed and which prevented both the timely clarification of the event and the establishment of their responsibilities at the time, in addition to the extent of the harm caused, so the sanction to be imposed—excluding the high part of the range, in attention to the concurrence of the modification of criminal responsibility recognized in favor of all of them—will be determined in the high part of the minimum range for the leadership (Morales Salgado), proceeding to regulate the sanction of the others in reason of their respective responsibilities and institutional positions, which allows ratifying what was decided with respect to Andrade Gómez and adjusting the situation of Chaigneau Sepúlveda to that parameter,” the sentence substantiates.

The Court's ruling continues: “That, finally, the sanction to be imposed on Juan Hernán Morales Salgado, Juvenal Piña Garrido, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Gladys Calderón Carreño, and Jorge Pichunman, as authors of the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López, must be individualized separately, as indicated by the judge of the degree, given the impossibility of applying in this case, with respect to them, Article 509 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as it is not a crime of the same species as the aggravated kidnapping of said victim, and for which their criminal responsibility has also been made effective.

For its regulation and attending to the consideration of the gravity and cruelty of the event, the time elapsed in their favor and to the detriment of the clarification of the truth, the extent of the harm caused, the rank that Morales Salgado held at the time of the events, the functions executed by him, and those deployed by his subordinates, the determination made in the appealed sentence in this regard is shared, without the consideration of the recognized mitigating factor being able to alter the regulated quantum, given the factors enunciated above and which have presided over the determination process carried out, for which reason what was resolved in this part will be ratified.”

In the civil aspect, the Treasury was ordered to pay compensation to the victims' relatives in the amounts detailed in the ruling.

Source: pjud.cl, April 25, 2023