Manuel Contreras, Pedro Espinoza, and Miguel Krassnoff are among those identified as responsible for the human rights case. Miguel Vásquez, the visiting judge of the Santiago Court of Appeals, determined the responsibility of 79 former members of the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) in the aggravated kidnapping of seven people and the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López, events that occurred between May 1976 and January 1977 and which constitute the so-called Conferencia Case.

The eight crimes were perpetrated during operations carried out by the secret police of the Augusto Pinochet dictatorship at the addresses Conferencia 1587, in the commune of Santiago; Gaspar de Orense 993, in the commune of Quinta Normal; Bello Horizonte 979, in the commune of Las Condes; and the Simón Bolívar 8800 barracks, in the commune of La Reina.

Those identified as responsible for the disappearance of Mario Zamorano Donoso, Jorge Muñoz Poutays, Uldarico Donaire Cortés, Jaime Donato Avendaño, Elisa Escobar Zepeda, Lenin Díaz Silva, and Eliana Espinoza Fernández, and the death of Víctor Díaz López are: Manuel Contreras Sepúlveda, Pedro Espinoza Bravo, Carlos López Tapia, Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko, Ricardo Lawrence Mires, Jorge Madariaga Acevedo, Eugenio Fieldhouse Chávez, José Fuentealba Saldías, Hugo Clavería Leiva, José Soto Torres, Raúl Soto Pérez, Juan Carlos Escobar Valenzuela, Jerónimo Neira Méndez, Héctor Briones Burgos, Pedro Mora Villanueva, Roberto Rodríguez Manquel, Leonidas Méndez Moreno, Jorge Andrade Gómez, Nelson Herrera Lagos, Juan Morales Salgado, Jorge Sagardía Monje, Héctor Valdebenito Araya, Federico Chaigneau Sepúlveda, Bernardo Daza Navarro, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Guillermo Ferrán Martínez, Gladys Calderón Carreño, Elisa Magna Astudillo, Heriberto del Carmen Acevedo, Emilio Troncoso Vivallos, Claudio Pacheco Fernández, Jorge Díaz Radulovich, Orlando Altamirano Sanhueza, Eduardo Cabezas Mardones, Jorge Escobar Fuentes, René Riveros Valderrama, Jorge Pichunmán Curiqueo, Orfa Saavedra Vásquez, Celinda Aspe Rojas, Teresa Navarro Navarro, Berta Jiménez Escobar, Adriana Rivas González, Jorge Arriagada Mora, Pedro Bitterlich Jaramillo, Eduardo Oyarce Riquelme, Guillermo Díaz Ramírez, Ana Vilches Muñoz, Italia Vacarella Gilio, Jorge Manríquez Manterola, Orlando Torrejón Gatica, José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, Manuel Obreque Henríquez, Gustavo Guerrero Aguilera, Eduardo Garea Guzmán, Juvenal Piña Garrido, Rufino Jaime Astorga, Luis Lagos Yáñez, María Angélica Guerrero Soto, Sergio Castro Andrade, Manuel Montre Méndez, Pedro Gutiérrez Valdés, Claudio Orellana de la Pinta, Joyce Ahumada Despouy, Hiro Álvarez Vega, José Miguel Meza Serrano, José Ojeda Obando, Carlos Bermúdez Méndez, Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, Eduardo Reyes Lagos, Marilin Silva Vergara, Hernán Sovino Maturana, José Friz Esparza, Carlos Miranda Mesa, Camilo Torres Negrier, Orlando Inostroza Lagos, Carlos López Inostroza, José Seco Alarcón, Lionel Medrano Rivas, Juan Suazo Saldaña. The plaintiffs in the Conferencia case, the State Defense Council (CDE) and the Human Rights Program of the Ministry of the Interior, were notified to either adhere to Vázquez's indictment or present their own. Once these are defined, the defense teams of the accused will be notified for the plenary stage prior to the first-instance sentence.

JUDGE CARROZA'S PROCEEDINGS

Meanwhile, the visiting judge of the Santiago Court of Appeals, Mario Carroza, indicted former lieutenant Kenny Aravena Sepúlveda for his responsibility in the homicides of Jorge Pacheco Durán, Denrio Álvarez Olivares, and Ernesto Mardones, which occurred on December 19, 1973.

According to the document, a military patrol removed the deceased from the Santiago Public Prison to transport them to the Buin No. 1 Regiment under Aravena's command, and one hour later, the officer left the bodies of the three detainees at the Legal Medical Service (SML).

Carroza also issued an indictment for the homicides of Luis Herrera González and Mario Parra Guzmán, which occurred in September 1973, holding Pedro Silva Jiménez, Jaime García Zamorano, Jorge Muñoz Pontony, and Pedro Rivera Piña responsible for the crimes. "On September 27, 1973, a military patrol went to the company Chilean Autos and proceeded to arrest two of its workers, union leaders, Luis Ricardo Herrera González and Mario Parra Guzmán; immediately thereafter, they transported them to the facilities of the Army War Academy (...) subsequently, without any justification, Major Jorge Muñoz Pontony and Captain Benjamín Araya Pérez ordered Captain Jaime García Zamorano and second soldiers Pedro Rivera Piña and Pedro Silva Jiménez to execute the detainees," the investigation indicates.

Source: 24horas.cl, October 22, 2013

"Mamo's" secretary among 53 accused in Conferencia case

Adriana Rivas, sought for extradition from Australia, appears alongside other women, such as the so-called "Doctor Hoffman," among those indicted for the extermination of the Communist Party leadership at the hands of DINA brigades.

A raw account that includes the action of military personnel in the exhumation of bodies from Cuesta Barriga under the protection of the Carabineros, and the active participation of, among others, the extraditable Adriana Rivas, former secretary to Manuel Contreras, is included in Judge Miguel Vásquez's indictment against 53 former agents of the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) in the "Calle Conferencia Two" case.

Rivas remains in Australia and her extradition has been requested since Thursday, January 16, by the Supreme Court at the request of the visiting judge, who has included her in this proceeding for the extermination of the second leadership of the Communist Party in 1976.

In September 2013, the woman who formally served as secretary to the director of the DINA made statements to the Australian broadcaster SBS that caused a stir when she said she defended torture and, furthermore, noted that those years when she belonged to the repressive apparatus were the best of her youth.

Considered an agent of the Lautaro Brigade, the woman indicated in that conversation that torture in her country during the Augusto Pinochet regime was "an open secret" and described it as a "necessary" technique to "break people."

DOCTOR HOFFMAN IS ALSO AMONG THE ACCUSED

The resolution considers 10 other women, all identified as participants in the torture of political prisoners who were later murdered and forcibly disappeared, including Berta Jiménez, Celinda Aspe, and Gladys Calderón, who allegedly acted by inoculating toxic elements and was known as "Doctor Hoffman." Part of the document highlights one of the testimonies that established that "Adriana Rivas and Berta Jiménez were operatives" and that although "on paper all the women were secretaries," it is noted that "the truth is that they were operatives" and that "Celinda Aspe was the most operative of the female agents."

AT THE GATES OF SENTENCING

The process, which is advancing at a rapid pace toward sentencing, indicates that starting on December 13, 1976, DINA brigades captured Fernando Navarro Allendes, Lincoyán Berríos Cataldo, Horacio Cepeda Marinkovic, Fernando Ortiz Letelier, Héctor Véliz Ramírez, and Waldo Ulises Pizarro Molina in various operations.

The construction of the case by the magistrate indicates that they were all taken to the Simón Bolívar barracks in La Reina, where they were interrogated under torture, then forcibly disappeared, and that minimal remains of some of them were found at illegal burial sites.

THE DETAIL WITH THE LIST OF THE ACCUSED

"I. To (1) Juan Manuel Guillermo Contreras Sepúlveda, (2) Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, (3) Juan Hernán Morales Salgado, (4) Ricardo Víctor Lawrence Mires, (5) Federico Humberto Chaigneau Sepúlveda, (6) Hernán Luis Sovino Maturana, (7) Gladys de las Mercedes Calderón Carreño, (8) Eduardo Antonio Reyes Lagos, (9) Juvenal Alfonso Piña Garrido, (10) José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, (11) Pedro Segundo Bitterlich Jaramillo, (12) Jorge Laureano Sagardía Monje, (13) Héctor Raúl Valdebenito Araya, (14) Bernardo del Rosario Daza Navarro, (15) Sergio Orlando Escalona Acuña, (16) Jorge Lientur Manríquez Manterola, (17) José Miguel Meza Serrano, (18) Luis Alberto Lagos Yáñez, (19) María Angélica Guerrero Soto, (20) Jorge Iván Díaz Radulovich, (21) Guillermo Jesús Ferrán Martínez, (22) Jorge Segundo Pichunmán Curiqueo, (23) Orfa Yolanda Saavedra Vásquez, (24) Elisa del Carmen Magna Astudillo, (25) Claudio Orlando Orellana de la Pinta, (26) Eduardo Alejandro Oyarce Riquelme, (27) Heriberto del Carmen Acevedo, (28) Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, (29) Emilio Hernán Troncoso Vivallos, (30) Sergio Hernán Castro Andrade, (31) Teresa del Carmen Navarro Navarro, (32) Juan Edmundo Suazo Saldaña, (33) Orlando Jesús Torrejón Gatica, (34) José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, (35) Carlos Enrique Miranda Mesa, (36) Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, (37) Orlando del Tránsito Altamirano Sanhueza, (38) Gustavo Enrique Guerrero Aguilera, (39) Manuel Antonio Montre Méndez, (40) Guillermo Eduardo Díaz Ramírez, (41) Hiro Álvarez Vega, (42) Celinda Angélica Aspe Rojas, (43) Jorge Hugo Arriagada Mora, (44) Berta Yolanda del Carmen Jiménez Escobar, (45) Carlos Justo Bermúdez Méndez, (46) Eduardo Patricio Cabezas Mardones, (47) Adriana Elcira Rivas González, (48) Carlos Eusebio López Inostroza, (49) Italia Donata Vaccarella Gilio, Camilo Torres Negrier, Joyce Ana Ahumada Despouy, Marilín Melahani Silva Vergara, and José Domingo Seco Alarcón, as co-authors of the crimes of aggravated kidnapping of Fernando Alfredo Navarro Allendes, committed starting December 13, 1976, and Lincoyán Yalú Berríos Cataldo, Horacio Cepeda Marinkovic, Juan Fernando Ortíz Letelier, Héctor Véliz Ramírez, committed starting December 15, 1976. II: To Juan Manuel Guillermo Contreras Sepúlveda, Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, Juan Hernán Morales Salgado, and Ricardo Víctor Lawrence Mires, as co-authors of the crime of aggravated kidnapping of Waldo Ulises Pizarro Molina, committed starting December 15, 1976. III. To Juan Manuel Guillermo Contreras Sepúlveda, Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, Juan Hernán Morales Salgado, Ricardo Víctor Lawrence Mires, Eduardo Antonio Reyes Lagos, Juvenal Alfonso Piña Garrido, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Pedro Segundo Bitterlich Jaramillo, Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, Jorge Iván Díaz Radulovich, Heriberto del Carmen Acevedo, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, Emilio Hernán Troncoso Vivallos, Orlando Jesús Torrejón Gatica, Orlando del Tránsito Altamirano Sanhueza, Carlos Enrique Miranda Mesa, Guillermo Eduardo Díaz Ramírez, Eduardo Patricio Cabezas Mardones, Carlos Eusebio López Inostroza, and José Domingo Seco Alarcón, as co-authors of three crimes of aggravated homicide of Juan Fernando Ortiz Letelier, Horacio Cepeda Marinkovic, and Lincoyán Yalú Berríos Cataldo, perpetrated between December 15, 1976, and December 25, 1976, in the city of Santiago."

Source: La Nación, February 7, 2014

Case File 2.182-98; "Conferencia 2" episode p) Testimony of María Angélica Guerrero Soto, from page 1420 and following of the Separate Notebook, in which she indicates that at the end of 1975 or the first months of 1976, by order of Morales, the Lautaro Brigade moved to the barracks located on Simón Bolívar.

From the date the Lautaro Brigade arrived, the groups that were under the command of Captain Germán Barriga and Captain Ricardo Lawrence, which occurred in mid-1976, began to receive detainees, who were brought in by all the agents, as everyone intervened in the missions according to the orders given by Morales Salgado, who was the chief.

She remembers participating in the detention of a person, which took place on the street, at Matta and Santa Rosa, which she believes corresponds to Horacio Cepeda, according to the photograph shown to her, a photograph that corresponds exactly to the detained person, who was going to a point about which the agents were informed, and who, once detained, was blindfolded inside the car.

Once detained, they went to the barracks, where his data was taken and then he was taken to the gymnasium, where he was interrogated. Regarding Fernando Ortiz Letelier, at that same time I saw him in the gymnasium lying on the floor, he was very bad, in very poor condition, but very bad physically, as a result of the interrogations to which he had been subjected. ll) Account of María Angélica Guerrero Soto, from page 1420 and following of the Separate Notebook, in which she states that in mid-1976 with the arrival of the Lautaro Brigade, the groups that were under the command of Captain Germán Barriga and Captain Ricardo Lawrence began to receive detainees. Among the agents were, among others, Leyton, Acevedo, the "Elephant" surnamed Piña, Troncoso Vivallos, and in these groups, Leyton, the "Elephant," Bitterlich, and the two officers, Lawrence and Barriga, stood out for the violence of their procedures. In the gymnasium, they were interrogated especially by the brigades of Lawrence and Barriga, but they were also ordered to participate in the interrogations or to be present there to provide the help that was required. The illegitimate coercion, which consisted mainly of the application of electric current, punches, and kicks, was committed, apart from the officers, by the "Elephant," Leyton, Bitterlich, sometimes Valdebenito, and others. On one occasion, she went to Cuesta Barriga to drop off the bodies of detainees to throw them into the well of an abandoned mine, and from Lawrence's group were the "Elephant," Bitterlich, Troncoso Vivallos, "Dago," "Mario Primero," almost everyone from that group went, even Acevedo, Leyton, and Pacheco must have been present.

Source: Judiciary, December 28, 2016

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

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

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

The Santiago Court of Appeals confirmed the sentence that convicted 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, who was detained on December 15, 1976, in the current commune of Macul and taken to the clandestine detention barracks located at Simón Bolívar Street No. 8800, commune of La Reina, from where her trail was lost.

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

Meanwhile, as co-authors, 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 background information that allowed 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, the reasoning in the sentence under review is shared, for the purpose of establishing the participation of the convicted persons, insofar as the evidentiary background outlined in the appealed sentence, in the fourteenth grounds against Espinoza Bravo, seventeenth against Morales Salgado, twentieth against Lawrence Mires, twenty-ninth against Calderón Carreño, thirty-second against Piña Garrido, forty-first against Valdebenito Araya, forty-fourth against Escalona Acuña, forty-seventh against Manríquez Manterola, sixty-fifth against Saavedra Vásquez, sixty-eighth against Magna Astudillo, seventy-first against Oyarce Riquelme, seventy-fourth against Acevedo, seventy-seventh against Pacheco Fernández, eightieth against Troncoso Vivallos, eighty-sixth against Navarro Navarro, ninety-fifth against Sarmiento Sotelo, one hundred and seventh against Guerrero Aguilera, and one hundred and twenty-second 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-authors, in the terms provided for in Article 15 No. 1 of the Penal Code, in accordance with the reasoning in the fifteenth, eighteenth, twenty-first, thirtieth, thirty-third, forty-second, forty-fifth, forty-eighth, sixty-sixth, sixty-ninth against Magna Astudillo, seventy-second, seventy-fifth, seventy-seventh, eighty-first, eighty-seventh, ninety-fifth, one hundred and seventh, and one hundred and twenty-third grounds respectively, and which is complemented by the reasoning in the one hundred and seventy-third, one hundred and seventy-eighth, one hundred and eighty-second, one hundred and eighty-sixth, one hundred and eighty-ninth, one hundred and ninety-fifth, one hundred and ninety-seventh, two hundred and third, two hundred and sixth, and two hundred and tenth foundations," it is detailed. The resolution adds that: "At this point, it should be specified that the participation as co-author attributed to Juan Morales Salgado fits fully into 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 that capacity to coordinate the operational work of the brigades that acted under his command, especially in relation to the dismantling of the Communist Party, assigning personnel under his command for this purpose, directing investigation work, and receiving the corresponding reports, arranging for the entry and detention of the detainees at the unit, as well as the interrogations and torture to which they were subjected and, where appropriate, their death and disappearance, establishing that he was present during the interrogation and torture of the victim of 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-author, in the terms provided for in Article 15 No. 1 of the Penal Code, imputed to the accused 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 the fifty-seventh foundation of the appealed sentence, to which is added the reasoning in the one hundred and ninety-third motivation," 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 thirty-fifth grounds against Ojeda Obando, fiftieth against Meza Serrano, fifty-third against Lagos Yáñez, fifty-ninth against Díaz Radulovich, sixty-second against Pichunmán Curiqueo, eighty-third against Castro Andrade, ninety-eighth against Miranda Mesa, one hundred and first against Álvarez Droguett, one hundred and fourth against Altamirano Sanhueza, one hundred and thirteenth against Díaz Ramírez, one hundred and twenty-fifth against Jiménez Escobar, one hundred and thirty-fourth against López Inostroza, and one hundred and forty-third 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 thirty-sixth, fifty-first, fifty-fourth, sixtieth, sixty-third, eighty-fourth, ninety-ninth, one hundred and second, one hundred and fifth, one hundred and fourteenth, one hundred and twenty-sixth, one hundred and thirty-fifth, and one hundred and forty-fourth foundations, to which are added the reasonings one hundred and seventy-first, one hundred and seventy-ninth, one hundred and eighty-seventh, one hundred and ninety-eighth, two hundred, two hundred and fourth, and two hundred and eighth 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 performed management tasks and operational personnel coexisted, dedicated both to investigation and to the detention, custody, interrogation, torture, and, where appropriate, death and disappearance of the detainees, in which one observes, on the one hand, the division of roles typical of co-authorship, since all of them made a functional contribution to the execution of the crime, each of them having the 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." "In that understanding, contrary to what the defense teams point out in court in support of their appeals, it is convenient to specify that the convicted persons 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 records, 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 at 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, 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 Simón Bolívar Street No. 8800, 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 the door guard was kept, a house at the back, a five-a-side soccer field, parking lots, and on the left side of the property a kind of gymnasium where there was a canteen, kitchen, and some changing 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 primarily concerned with investigating, locating, raiding, pursuing, repressing, and dismantling the members of the Communist Party, especially its leadership, for which provisional facilities were enabled; consisting of offices, a gymnasium, and changing 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, approximately at 8:30 PM, while waiting for public transport, by security agents on December 15, 1976, at the corner of Exequiel Fernández and Rodrigo de Araya, 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 put inside the vehicle. The detention was materialized 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 barracks of 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 forcibly disappeared, without any news of her whereabouts to 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 case file, case file Roll 2-77, in which it was verified that the route sheet that recorded said circumstances had been falsified. f) That the victim of these records 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 people mentioned above, 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 lost consciousness."

Source: pjud.cl, March 4, 2022