Miguel Krassnoff, Marcelo Moren Brito, and Raúl Iturriaga Neumann are among those implicated.

The minister for extraordinary cases of human rights violations at the Santiago Court of Appeals, Hernán Crisosto, sentenced 77 agents of the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) this Monday for their responsibility in the kidnapping of Héctor Garay Hermosilla in 1974.

Garay Hermosilla, a member of the Revolutionary Student Front (FER), was 19 years old when he was detained near his home on July 8, 1974. Days later, his name appeared in the national press on a false list of 119 people killed due to alleged internal disputes within the MIR, in what was known as "Operación Colombo".

According to the judge's findings, "the publications that declared the victim Garay Hermosilla dead had their origin in disinformation maneuvers carried out by DINA agents abroad."

According to the reconstruction of events carried out by the visiting minister, the DINA agents who captured Garay "forced him into the back of a gray Chevrolet C-10 pickup truck and took him to the home of a friend of the victim, who was also forced into the aforementioned truck, to be driven to an unknown destination."

"Subsequently, it was established through testimonies that Héctor Marcial Garay Hermosilla passed through the clandestine detention center known as 'Londres 38', which was guarded by armed guards and to which only DINA agents had access," the ruling continues, establishing that to date, there is no further information regarding Garay's whereabouts.

The convicted In the resolution, the presiding judge imposed sentences of 13 years in prison on: César Manríquez Bravo, Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, Marcelo Luis Moren Brito, Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko, and Raúl Eduardo Iturriaga Neumann, as authors of the crime perpetrated in 1974.

Meanwhile, the following former agents must serve 10 years in prison, also as authors: Gerardo Ernesto Urrich González, Gerardo Ernesto Godoy García, Ricardo Víctor Lawrence Mires, Ciro Ernesto Torré Sáez, Sergio Hernán Castillo González, Manuel Andrés Carevic Cubillos, José Nelson Fuentealba Saldías, Basclay Humberto Zapata Reyes, José Enrique Fuentes Torres, José Mario Friz Esparza, Julio José Hoyos Zegarra, Nelson Alberto Paz Bustamante, Claudio Orlando Orellana de la Pinta, Enrique Tránsito Gutiérrez Rubilar, Gustavo Galvarino Caruman Soto, Hiro Álvarez Vega, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Olegario Enrique González Moreno, Orlando Jesús Torrejón Gatica, Rudeslindo Urrutia Jorquera, Alfredo Orlando Moya Tejeda, Carlos Alfonso Sáez Sanhueza, Fernando Enrique Guerra Guajardo, Hernán Patricio Valenzuela Salas, Hugo Rubén Delgado Carrasco, Juan Alfredo Villanueva Alvear, Juan Evaristo Duarte Gallegos, Lautaro Eugenio Díaz Espinoza, Leónidas Emiliano Méndez Moreno, Pedro Ariel Araneda Araneda, Rafael de Jesús Riveros Frost, Víctor Manuel Molina Astete, Máximo Ramón Aliaga Soto, Manuel Rivas Díaz, Juan Ángel Urbina Cáceres, Risiere del Prado Altez España, Raúl Juan Rodríguez Ponte, Hermon Helec Alfaro Mundaca, and Hugo del Tránsito Hernández Valle.

As accomplices to the crime of aggravated kidnapping of Garay Hermosilla, the presiding judge imposed sentences of 4 years in prison on: Luis Eduardo Mora Cerda, José Jaime Mora Diocares, Camilo Torres Negrier, Carlos Justo Bermúdez Méndez, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, Fernando Adrián Roa Montaña, Gerardo Meza Acuña, Héctor Raúl Valdebenito Araya, Jaime Humberto Paris Ramos, Jorge Laureano Sagardia Monje, José Dorohi Hormazábal Rodríguez, José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, José Stalin Muñoz Leal, Juvenal Alfonso Piña Garrido, Luis René Torres Méndez, Manuel Antonio Montre Méndez, Moisés Paulino Campos Figueroa, Nelson Aquiles Ortiz Vignolo, Nelson Eduardo Iturriaga Cortés, Pedro Segundo Bitterlich Jaramillo, Reinaldo Alfonso Concha Orellana, Sergio Hernán Castro Andrade, Víctor Manuel de la Cruz San Martín Jiménez, Gustavo Humberto Apablaza Meneses, Héctor Carlos Díaz Cabezas, Jorge Antonio Lepileo Barrios, Óscar Belarmino la Flor Flores, Rufino Espinoza Espinoza, Héctor Manuel Lira Aravena, Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett, Sergio Iván Díaz Lara, Juan Miguel Troncoso Soto, and Roberto Hernán Rodríguez Manquel.

Meanwhile, Rodolfo Valentino Cocha Rodríguez and Armando Segundo Cofre Correa were acquitted due to lack of participation in the events.

Source: t13.cl, August 31, 2015

The appellate court confirmed the sentence convicting 30 agents of the defunct Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (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 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 that condemned Pedro Espinoza Bravo, Juan Morales Salgado, and Ricardo Lawrence Mires to 10 years in prison as perpetrators of the crime.

Meanwhile, 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 in the kidnapping and disappearance of the medical technologist.

“That, in this regard, the reasoning in the reviewed sentence is shared for the purpose of establishing the participation of the convicted individuals, as the evidentiary records outlined in the appealed sentence—in the points regarding Espinoza Bravo, Morales Salgado, Lawrence Mires, Calderón Carreño, Piña Garrido, Valdebenito Araya, Escalona Acuña, Manríquez Manterola, Saavedra Vásquez, Magna Astudillo, Oyarce Riquelme, Acevedo, Pacheco Fernández, Troncoso Vivallos, Navarro Navarro, Sarmiento Sotelo, Guerrero Aguilera, and Arriagada Mora—constitute a set of judicial presumptions which, given their multiplicity, gravity, precision, and consistency, and for meeting the legal requirements provided 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 in Article 15 No. 1 of the Penal Code,” the document details.

The resolution adds: “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.

In that capacity, it was his duty to coordinate the operational work of the brigades acting under his command, especially in relation to the dismantling of the Partido Comunista, assigning personnel under his charge for this purpose, directing investigation efforts, receiving the corresponding reports, and ordering the entry and detention of prisoners at the unit, as well as the interrogations and torture to which they were subjected and, where applicable, their death and disappearance.

It was established 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, meaning 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 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 records indicated in the fifty-seventh finding 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, as the indications pointed out in the points regarding Ojeda Obando, Meza Serrano, Lagos Yáñez, Díaz Radulovich, Pichunmán Curiqueo, Castro Andrade, Miranda Mesa, Álvarez Droguett, Altamirano Sanhueza, Díaz Ramírez, Jiménez Escobar, López Inostroza, and Ahumada Despouy possess the necessary strength to configure judicial presumptions which, given their multiplicity, gravity, precision, and consistency, allow for the accreditation of the participation attributed to them as accomplices, in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the Penal Code.”

For the appellate court, in this instance: “(…) as noted, it has been sufficiently demonstrated that all the accused were part of an organized structure under subordination and dependency, in which those who exercised management duties and operational personnel coexisted, dedicated to investigation as well as the detention, custody, interrogation, torture, and, where applicable, the 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, through prior or simultaneous acts, which is what characterizes complicity.”

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

Reinalda Pereira Plaza, which also leads to ruling out the intervention of those accused for whom, despite it having been established that they were part of the same institution and performed duties at the property located at Simón Bolívar N° 8.800 in La Reina, their punishable participation in any of the forms provided 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 Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (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 door 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 mess hall, kitchen, and changing rooms and bathrooms, which were conditioned to be used as dungeons. This property was where the Lautaro brigade, under the command of Major Juan Morales Salgado, operated and was used as a secret and clandestine place of confinement; people were brought to said facility 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 Partido Comunista.
• b) That likewise, in the second half of 1976, DINA groups under the command of officers Germán Barriga and Ricardo Lawrence moved to said facility, together with their operational agents, who were fundamentally concerned with investigating, locating, raiding, pursuing, repressing, and dismantling members of the Partido Comunista, especially their leadership, for which provisional facilities were enabled for their installation, consisting of offices, a gymnasium, and changing rooms that were confinement dungeons, where interrogations and torture were carried out using various methods of coercion.
• 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 and grabbed her violently. When she screamed 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 carried out, 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 forcibly disappeared, with no news of her whereabouts to date.
• e) That the Chilean government of the time, given the search efforts made by her relatives, reported that the affected person had registered an exit ‘on foot’ through the Los Libertadores border crossing between Chile and Argentina on December 21, 1976, an official version that was judicially established as false, as stated in the case file 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 Partido Comunista 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 Partido Comunista and not an isolated event.
• g) That all the aforementioned people, including the victim, were detained to be interrogated and tortured due to their political militancy and in order to obtain information about their party activities and the identification of other members of the Partido Comunista 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

Supreme Court confirms ruling convicting DINA agent for aggravated homicide at Villa Grimaldi

In a unanimous ruling, the Second Chamber of the highest court rejected the cassation appeal filed by the defense of the agent of the dissolved Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA), Claudio Pacheco Fernández, against the sentence that convicted him for his responsibility in the crime of aggravated homicide of the agricultural technician Cedomil Lucas Lausic Glasinovic.

The crime was perpetrated in April 1975, at the clandestine detention center of Villa Grimaldi.

The Supreme Court rejected the cassation appeal filed by the defense of the agent of the dissolved DINA, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, against the sentence issued by the Santiago Court of Appeals that convicted him for his responsibility in the crime of aggravated homicide of the agricultural technician Cedomil Lucas Lausic Glasinovic.

The crime was perpetrated in April 1975, at the clandestine detention center of Villa Grimaldi.

In a unanimous ruling (case file 44.105-2020), the Second Chamber of the highest court—composed of justices Haroldo Brito, Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Jorge Dahm, Leopoldo Llanos, and lawyer (i) Ricardo Abuauad—ruled out any error of law in the challenged sentence, which sentenced Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko, Rolf Wenderoth Pozo, and the appellant Pacheco Fernández to 10 years and one day in prison as perpetrators of the crime.

“That, in the same sense, it is precise to point out that the considerations may seem frivolous or insufficient to the appellant, ‘but what the law requires in No. 4 of Article 500 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that the sentence contain considerations, because the total omission of them is what can bring as a consequence that what according to that precept must be produced does not occur, whether regarding the facts attributed to the defendant, their exemption from responsibility, or the mitigation of it’ (SCS, 13.01.1961, R., T. 58, sec. 4th, p. 21).

To decide on the ground for nullity ‘it only corresponds to verify whether or not the motivation required by law exists, without entering into a pronouncement regarding the value or legality of the statements that arise from it’ (SCS, 29.01.1982, R., T. 79, sec. 4th, p. 9).

In the Repertory of the Code of Criminal Procedure, T. III, p. 283, there are ten sentences that, in summary, circumscribe the cause for cassation to the omission of considerations and ascribe to it an eminently objective character.

It is enough to verify whether or not the reasoning exists, ‘without it being appropriate to weigh the intrinsic merit of them or the value of conviction that should be attributed to them.’ Precisely, what is objected to in the brief is the merit, intrinsic value, or extent given by the judges to their reasoning, on the basis of the weighed evidence, a reproach foreign to the appeal in question,” the ruling maintains.

The resolution adds: “That although the aforementioned reasoning is sufficient to dismiss the formal nullity appeal filed by the convicted Pacheco Fernández, it should be highlighted that the first-instance ruling—adopted in that section by the sentence under review—exposed in a detailed manner, in its thirteenth finding, the motives that led to the decision to convict the actor as the perpetrator of the crime of aggravated homicide investigated in the case.

It is thus that it alludes to the fact that ‘the detainees in that prisoner facility remember him perfectly, they even knew him by his nickname,’ in addition to citing the testimonies of Claudio Alfredo Zaror Zaror and Lautaro Robín Videla Moya—who identified him photographically as the police agent nicknamed ‘Este niño’ (This boy), who participated in the group of people who assaulted the victim—to finally conclude that ‘it is a DINA agent who participates actively and directly in the beating that Lausic receives in his confinement in Villa Grimaldi, which subsequently causes his death, which demonstrates that we are in the presence of a direct perpetrator of his death (…),’” the ruling states.

Therefore, it is resolved that: “THE CASSATION APPEAL filed by the defense of the convicted Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández against the sentence issued by the Santiago Court of Appeals, dated January 9, 2020, IS REJECTED.”

Beating with chains

In the first-instance resolution, visiting judge Mario Carroza established the following facts:

“The victim Cedomil Lucas Lausic Glasinovic, a militant of the MIR, 28 years old, single, agricultural technician, was detained at his home located at Calle Carlos Cariola N° 6375, in the commune of Cerrillos on April 3, 1975, by DINA agents, and then taken to the Villa Grimaldi barracks, a facility where he was locked up and interrogated under torture to, according to testimonies, ‘soften him up,’ and force him to reveal to his captors the need to go out to the street to carry out a meeting between him and a high-ranking leader of the MIR, a meeting that does not materialize and, on the contrary, the victim takes advantage of it to make attempts to escape, which do not prosper and he is recaptured; That due to the above, the agents return with Cedomil Lausic, known among the agents as ‘El Yugoslavo’ (The Yugoslav), to Villa Grimaldi and in the courtyard, according to what was declared by the detainees who remained in different parts of the same facility, they inflict an inhumane and brutal beating with chains, blows that were inflicted by agents who were under the command of the deceased Marcelo Moren Brito, in a first instance and subsequently, by the rebel defendant Ricardo Lawrence Mires; At the end of these tortures, Cedomil Lausic is taken in an agonizing state to his cell, where he remains so for days, until he finally dies and his remains are found by his relatives at the Servicio Médico Legal.”

In the civil aspect, the sentence that ordered the state to pay an indemnity of $30,000,000 (thirty million pesos) for moral damages to the victim's brother was maintained.

Source: pjud.cl, October 21, 2022

Supreme Court sends 59 former DINA agents to prison for Operation Colombo

Operation Colombo was a major intelligence operation and a communication setup by the DINA, which attempted to make 119 people kidnapped in Chile appear as having been killed abroad.

The Second Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court revoked the sentence that had acquitted more than 60 former agents of the Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA) and convicted them as responsible for the disappearance of 16 left-wing militants, mostly from the MIR, in the process known as Operation Colombo, which in this case was perpetrated between June 17, 1974, and January 6, 1975, during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet.

The ruling was issued by justices Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Jorge Dahm, Leopoldo Llanos, María Teresa Letelier, and Diego Simpertigue, who revoked the sentence issued by the Court of Appeals and sentenced the former DINA chiefs and officers César Manríquez Bravo, Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, Miguel Krassnoff, and Raúl Iturriaga Neumann to 15 years and one day of major imprisonment in its maximum degree as perpetrators of the crimes of aggravated kidnapping of the victims.

Likewise, the court sentenced 53 former agents to an effective penalty of 10 years and one day of major imprisonment in its medium degree, as perpetrators of the same crime, who had been previously acquitted by the capital's appellate court, despite having been convicted in the first instance as accomplices and perpetrators.

Furthermore, this time all of them must enter prison, with some of them already being in prison for other crimes against humanity.

These are the former DINA agents Fernando Eduardo Lauriani Maturana, Gerardo Ernesto Godoy García, Manuel Andrés Carevic, Rosa Humilde Ramos Hernández, Nelson Alberto Paz Bustamante, Jose Abel Aravena Ruiz, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, Nelson Aquiles Ortiz Vignolo, Rudeslindo Urrutia Jorquera, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Manuel Heriberto Avendaño Gonzalez, Raúl Juan Rodríguez Ponte, Alejandro Francisco Astudillo Adonis, Daniel Alberto Galaz Orellana, Francisco Maximiliano Ferrer Lima, Leoncio Enrique Velásquez Guala, José Enrique Fuentes Torres, Julio José Hoyos Zegarra, Pedro René Alfaro Fernández, Orlando Jesús Torrejón Gatica, José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, Luis René Torres Méndez, Rodolfo Valentino Concha Rodríguez, Enrique Tránsito Gutiérrez Rubilar, Hugo Del Tránsito Hernández Valle, Manuel Rivas Diaz, Daniel Valentín Cancino Varas, Juan Evangelista Duarte Gallegos, Víctor Manuel Molina Astete, Fernando Enrique Guerra Guajardo, Leónidas Emiliano Méndez Moreno, Jorge Antonio Lepileo Barrios, Lautaro Eugenio Díaz Espinoza, Pedro Ariel Aravena Aravena, Carlos Alfonso Sáez Sanhueza, Juan Carlos Villanueva Alvear, Alfredo Orlando Moya Tejeda, Rafael De Jesús Riveros Frost, Silvio Antonio Concha González, Luis Fernando Espinace Contreras, Hernán Patricio Valenzuela Salas, Palmira Isabel Almuna Guzmán, Sylvia Teresa Oyarce Pinto, Osvaldo Pulgar Gallardo, José Avelino Yévenes Vergara, Olegario Enrique González Moreno, Werner Zanghellini, and Hector Flores Vergara.

Jaime Alfonso Fernández Garrido received a sentence of 5 years and one day of major imprisonment in its minimum degree as a perpetrator of the crime of aggravated kidnapping of Ida Vera Almarza. Meanwhile, Samuel Fuenzalida Devia was sentenced to 541 days and one day for the same crime, but will not serve time in prison.

This is an extensive process that had its first-instance sentence in 2017 at the hands of judge Hernán Crisosto Greisse. In the course of the investigation, some agents have died, such as Basclay Zapata, Ciro Torré, Manzo Duran, and Ricardo Lawrence, among others.

For Nelson Caucoto, the plaintiff lawyer representing 13 of the 16 victims, this is “a transcendent ruling in Chilean judicial history, since the Supreme Court has restored the sense of justice for crimes of this nature, which had remained literally in a situation of unacceptable impunity.

The highest court has once again rejected the partial statute of limitations and the appeals of the defense of the convicted, and has accepted the appeals of the plaintiffs,” he noted.

Caucoto adds that “it is a modern ruling based on international law and domestic legislation. It is undoubted that justice operates in this case as a healing for so many relatives of victims who still survive, and it is a pity that others did not reach the end to see this.”

Operation Colombo was a major intelligence operation and a communication setup by the DINA, which attempted to make 119 people kidnapped in Chile by the DINA appear as having been killed abroad, claiming they had perished after fighting among themselves.

This process investigated the fate of 16 of those 119 victims. They are Francisco Aedo Carrasco, Jorge Elías Andrónicos Antequera, Juan Carlos Andrónicos Antequera, Jaime Buzio Lorca, Mario Calderón Tapia, Cecilia Castro Salvadores, Rodolfo Espejo Gómez, Agustín Fioraso Chau, Gregorio Gaete Farías, Mauricio Jorquera Encina, Isidro Pizarro Meniconi, Marcos Quiñones Lembach, Sergio Reyes Navarrete, Ida Vera Almarza, Juan Carlos Rodríguez Araya, and Jilberto Urbina Pizarro.

Source: radio.uchile.cl, March 3, 2023

In the ruling (case file 2.545-2019), the Sixth Chamber of the Court of Appeals—composed of Justices Graciela Gómez, Andrea Díaz-Muñoz, and Justice Matías de la Noi—confirmed the sentence issued by the visiting judge Miguel Vázquez Plaza against the convicted individuals, but modified the sentences by changing the participation of some defendants from complicity to authorship.

The Court of Appeals sentenced 47 former agents of the dissolved Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA) for the aggravated kidnapping 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 for the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López, victims of the so-called Conferencia 1 case.

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.

Additionally, Sergio Escalona Acuña, Gladys Calderón Carreño, and Sergio Pichunmán Cariqueo must serve a 12-year prison sentence 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 an 8-year prison sentence for his responsibility in the aggravated kidnapping of the victim Díaz López.

Agents Jorge Andrade Gómez and Federico Chaigneau Sepúlveda must serve a 6-year prison sentence 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, José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo, 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 Court of Appeals ruling considers the following facts in order to increase the sentences and change the nature of participation:

“That for the purpose of determining the quantum of the sentence, the following shall be kept in mind:

1.- That in this instance, 8 crimes of aggravated kidnapping have been 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, as well as the aggravated homicide of Víctor Díaz López.

2.- That 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 shall be sanctioned as authors of the 8 aforementioned kidnapping crimes.

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 shall be sentenced as co-authors of the aggravated kidnapping of Víctor Díaz Lopez.

4.- That, furthermore, 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, carried a penalty of presidio mayor in any of its degrees, while aggravated homicide carried a penalty of presidio mayor in its medium to maximum degree.

6.- That all the accused are favored by the mitigating circumstance of criminal responsibility of their irreproachable prior conduct,” the ruling states.

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

The sentence also reasons: “That, as previously indicated, the accused indicated in point 1 of motive 36° benefit from a mitigating circumstance and are not prejudiced by any aggravating circumstances, such 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 for each of the kidnapping crimes shall not be applied, excluding presidio mayor in its maximum degree.

Subsequently, the entire penal framework shall be increased by one degree due to the reiteration, ultimately remaining in presidio mayor in its medium to maximum degrees, regulating the specific amount of the custodial sanction decided for each one in consideration of the extent of the harm caused by the illicit acts—the 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 those convicted in them, attending to their institutional and operational position.

Consequently, regarding Espinoza Bravo and Krassnoff Martchenko, the sanction to be imposed shall be maintained at the quantum established by the first-instance judge, attentive to the roles played by both in the planning and perpetration of the cited crimes, the magnitude of the harm caused by such conduct, and its grading at the time, elements that allow for a more energetic reproach to be directed at them, without the consideration of the recognized mitigating circumstance being able to alter the regulated quantum, given that the criteria enunciated previously allow it to be determined as such.

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 shall be regulated in the high part of the lower degree resulting from the operation of increase due to the reiteration of crimes, that is, in the segment of presidio mayor in its medium degree, taking into account for this the gravity of the acts, 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 shall 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, for which reason the sanction to be imposed—excluding the high part of the bracket, in attention to the concurrence of the modification of criminal responsibility recognized in favor of all of them—shall be determined in the high part of the minimum bracket for the leadership (Morales Salgado), proceeding to regulate the sanction of the remaining individuals based on their respective responsibilities and institutional positions, which allows for the ratification of what was decided regarding Andrade Gómez and the adjustment of Chaigneau Sepúlveda’s situation 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 lower court judge, given the impossibility of applying Article 509 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in this case, as it is not a crime of the same species as the aggravated kidnapping of said victim, 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 act, the time elapsed in their favor and to the detriment of the clarification of the truth, the extent of the harm caused, the rank held by Morales Salgado at the time of the events, the functions executed by him, and those deployed by his subordinates, the determination made in the appealed sentence regarding this matter is shared, without the consideration of the recognized mitigating circumstance being able to alter the regulated quantum, taking into account the factors enunciated previously that have presided over the determination process carried out, for which reason what was resolved in this part shall be ratified.”

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

Source: pjud.cl, April 25, 2023

Supreme Court revokes ruling and sentences 14 former DINA agents for the crime against 17 communist militants in 1976

The Supreme Court sentenced 14 agents of the dissolved Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA) for their responsibility in the crimes of aggravated kidnapping of Luis Emilio Recabarren González, Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González, Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, Clara Elena Canteros Torres, Alejandro Rodríguez Urzúa, Daniel Palma Robledo, Carlos Enrique Godoy Lagarrigue, Iván Sergio Insunza Bascuñán, José Eduardo Santander Miranda, Mario Jesús Juica Vega, Víctor Hugo Morales Mazuela, Carlos Mario Vizcarra Cofré, Miguel Nazal Quiroz, Juan Aurelio Villarroel Zárate, and Julio Roberto Vega Vega; and the aggravated homicide of Eduardo Canteros Prado. The crimes were committed between April and August 1976, in the province of Santiago.

In a unanimous ruling (case roll 71.900-2020), the Second Chamber of the high court—composed of justices Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Jorge Dahm, María Cristina Gajardo, María Soledad Melo, and Eliana Quezada—revoked the sentence issued by the Eighth Chamber of the Santiago Court of Appeals in April 2020, which had applied the "half-prescription" (partial statute of limitations) to the accused.

In a replacement sentence, the Supreme Court sentenced former DINA leaders and former Army officers Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo and Jorge Claudio Andrade Gómez to 15 years and one day in prison as authors of 16 counts of aggravated kidnapping and 10 years and one day as authors of one count of aggravated homicide.

Meanwhile, Rolf Arnold Wenderoth Pozo was sentenced to two terms of 10 years and one day in prison as the author of three counts of aggravated kidnapping and one count of aggravated homicide; Juan Hernán Morales Salgado and Gladys de las Mercedes Calderón Carreño were sentenced to 10 years and one day in prison as authors of six counts of aggravated kidnapping.

In the case of former agents Sergio Orlando Escalona Acuña, Juvenal Alfonso Piña Garrido, Jorge Iván Díaz Radulovich, and Gustavo Enrique Guerrero Aguilera, they were sentenced to 5 years and one day in prison as authors of a single count of aggravated kidnapping.

Likewise, former agents Orlando Jesús Torrejón Gatica, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, Orlando del Tránsito Altamirano Sanhueza, and Carlos Eugenio López Inostroza must serve 7 years as accomplices to the 16 counts of aggravated kidnapping and 5 years and one day in prison as accomplices to the aggravated homicide.

Finally, Hermon Helec Alfaro Mundaca must serve 7 years as an accomplice to 15 counts of aggravated kidnapping and 5 years and one day in prison as an accomplice to the aggravated homicide.

The criminals Carlos José Leonardo López Tapia and Ricardo Víctor Lawrence Mires, who had been sentenced in the first-instance ruling issued by Judge Leopoldo Llanos in July 2017 to 20 years in prison, died during the course of the proceedings. Also deceased are those sentenced in the first instance: Ciro Ernesto Torré Sáez, Orlando José Manzo Durán, and Pedro Segundo Bitterlich Jaramillo.

In dismissing the "half-prescription," the Supreme Court establishes that: "(...) it is necessary to take into consideration that the matter under discussion must also be analyzed in accordance with international Human Rights regulations contained primarily in the Geneva Conventions, which prevent prescription, total or gradual, regarding crimes committed in cases of non-international armed conflicts."

The resolution adds that: "The same conclusion is reached considering both the norms of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons and those of the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, since, in accordance with those regulations, gradual prescription has the same nature as total prescription."

"From another perspective, legal doctrine on this matter has expressed that its foundations are found in the same considerations of social stability and legal certainty that gave rise to Article 93 of the Penal Code, but that it is intended to produce its effects in those cases where the realization of the ends provided for prescription does not occur naturally but rather at the end of a gradual process—that is, when the time necessary to prescribe is about to be fulfilled, which would justify the mitigation of the sentence," it adds.

"However," it continues, "it is evident that such a conclusion is for cases that do not present the characteristics of crimes against humanity, as these are imprescriptible. Consequently, for such mitigation to be appropriate, it is necessary that it be a crime in the process of prescribing, which does not happen in this case, so the passage of time produces no effect, because social reproach does not diminish with time, which only occurs in cases of common crimes."

The Facts

In the first-instance ruling, special judge Leopoldo Llanos Sagristá established that, within the framework of the systematic repression of opponents of the military regime, between the months of April and August 1976, the arrests of a series of people occurred, all of whom were members of the Partido Comunista.

On April 29, 1976, in the sector of Santa Rosa and Sebastopol streets in the commune of San Miguel, brothers Manuel Guillermo, 22, and Luis Emilio Recabarren González, 29, were arrested by DINA agents, along with Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, 20, and her two-year-old son. The minor was abandoned near his home during the night.

The following day, April 30, at 7:00 a.m., Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, 50, was arrested shortly after leaving his home in the same sector as he was preparing to board a public bus.

All the detainees were taken to the clandestine detention and torture center 'Villa Grimaldi'; Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González and Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas were also seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' facility, and Luis Emilio Recabarren González at 'Cuatro Álamos'. From those facilities, the DINA forcibly disappeared them.

On July 23, 1976, around 8:00 p.m., at the intersection of Rojas Magallanes and Panamá streets in the commune of La Florida, the young Clara Elena Canteros Torres, 21, was arrested by DINA agents. She was subdued as she got off public transport.

She was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi' where she was seen by witnesses, and on August 20, 1976, she was removed from that facility along with fellow detainees Mario Juica Vega and Óscar Ramos. Since then, they have been forcibly disappeared.

At 9:40 p.m., Eduardo Canteros Prado, 48, Clara Elena's uncle, a civil engineer, was arrested on the public thoroughfare by DINA agents in front of his home located on Panamá street, in the commune of La Florida. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi'. In 1990, his remains were found at the Las Tórtolas estate in Colina, a facility that belonged to the Army until 1980.

On July 27, 1976, around 5:15 p.m., Alejandro Rodríguez Urzúa, 49, was arrested by DINA agents from his office located at Mallinkrodt 70, Barrio Bellavista. They took him to the 'Villa Grimaldi' facility.

On August 4, 1976, Daniel Palma Robledo, 61, a businessman, was arrested in the morning on Avenida Matta, between San Diego and Arturo Prat streets; after picking up his mail, he bought a newspaper and was arrested as he was leaving. He was taken to an unknown destination, but was seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' extermination barracks.

On that same August 4, at 3:00 p.m., the physician Carlos Enrique Godoy Lagarrigue, 39, was arrested. He was seized during his commute between the San Bernardo Parochial Hospital and his private practice, located at the corner of Barros Arana and Arturo Prat streets. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi' and, subsequently, to 'Cuatro Álamos', from where he was forcibly disappeared.

During the night of August 4, the surgeon Iván Sergio Insunza Bascuñán, 43, was arrested by DINA agents while driving his vehicle. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi' and then to 'Cuatro Álamos'.

On August 6, 1976, shortly after leaving his home, around 9:30 a.m., student leader and Central Única de Trabajadores official José Eduardo Santander Miranda, 29, was arrested by DINA agents; surviving witnesses saw him at the 'Villa Grimaldi' facility.

On August 9, Víctor Hugo Morales Mazuela, 45, a carpenter and construction worker, union leader, and organization secretary for a regional branch of the Partido Comunista, was arrested in the morning in the vicinity of the 'Villa México' neighborhood in the commune of Maipú and was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi'. Subsequently, he was seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' barracks.

On that same August 9, Mario Jesús Juica Vega, 34, a merchant, was arrested around noon in the vicinity of Plaza Egaña, in the commune of Ñuñoa, and taken to 'Villa Grimaldi', a place where he was seen by numerous witnesses. On August 20, he was removed from that facility along with two other detainees, and since then, the DINA has kept them forcibly disappeared.

On August 11, 1976, at 9:00 a.m., while leaving his home located on Chiloé street, between Santa Rosa and Gran Avenida, in the commune of San Miguel, merchant Miguel Nazal Quiroz, 44, was arrested by DINA agents. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi'.

During the night of that same August 11, Carlos Mario Vizcarra Cofré, 31, an auto body repairman, was arrested at his home in Quinta Normal by agents who took him to 'Villa Grimaldi', a facility where witnesses saw him until August 25 of that same year. Subsequently, he was seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' facility.

On August 13, Juan Aurelio Villarroel Zárate, 55, a union leader and photoengraver, was arrested around noon by DINA agents near the Estación Mapocho while traveling from his home in Conchalí. He was taken to Villa Grimaldi.

On August 16, 1976, at 11:30 a.m., the worker Julio Roberto Vega Vega was arrested by DINA agents on Avenida Presidente Balmaceda, between Cueto and Libertad, in the commune of Santiago. Several witnesses saw him held both at 'Villa Grimaldi' and at the 'Simón Bolívar' barracks.

by Darío Núñez

Source: resumen.cl, July 30, 2023

Operation Colombo: Supreme Court sentences 25 DINA agents for the 1974 crime against a MIR detective

The Supreme Court confirmed the sentence that convicted 25 former agents of the Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA) for their responsibility in the aggravated kidnapping of photographer Teobaldo Antonio Tello Garrido, who has been forcibly disappeared since August 22, 1974, and is one of the 119 victims who appeared on the lists of the international disinformation maneuver known as "Operation Colombo."

Teobaldo Tello, 25, married, was a detective with the Investigative Police, a photographer, and a member of the Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (MIR). He was arrested and kidnapped in the afternoon of August 22 on a public street when he was preparing to hold a clandestine meeting in downtown Santiago.

His arrest was part of a repressive raid on members of the MIR linked to the Investigative Police and the Identification Cabinet.

In the sentence (roll 36.979-2020), the Second Chamber of the high court—composed of justices Haroldo Brito, Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Leopoldo Llanos, and ad hoc lawyers Eduardo Morales and Gonzalo Ruz—rejected the cassation appeals filed by the convicted individuals and ruled out any error in the challenged sentence.

The high court's ruling sentenced former Army officers and DINA leaders César Raúl Manríquez Bravo, Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko, and Raúl Eduardo Iturriaga Neumann to 13 years in prison for their responsibility as authors of the crime.

Meanwhile, also sentenced as authors of the crime to 10 years in prison were former officers Gerardo Ernesto Godoy García and Manuel Andrés Carevic Cubillos, and former agents Nelson Alberto Paz Bustamante, Julio José Hoyos Zegarra, Silvio Antonio Concha González, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Teresa del Carmen Osorio Navarro, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, José Abel Aravena Ruiz, Rosa Humilde Ramos Hernández, Pedro René Alfaro Fernández, Luis René Torres Méndez, Rodolfo Valentino Concha Rodríguez, Jerónimo del Carmen Neira Méndez, Palmira Isabel Almuna Guzmán, Leonidas Emiliano Méndez Moreno, Hermon Helec Alfaro Mundaca, Luis Rigoberto Videla Inzulza, and Jorge Segundo Madariaga Acevedo, the latter three being Investigative Police officers commissioned to the DINA.

Former agent Samuel Enrique Fuenzalida Devia must serve a sentence of 541 days in prison, with the benefit of conditional remission, as an author of the crime.

Finally, former agent Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett was sentenced to 4 years in prison, with the benefit of supervised release, as an accomplice to the crime.

The sentence dismissed any infringement regarding the facts established by the first-instance courts, as they involved crimes against humanity.

"Regarding the ground contained in Article 546 No. 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, given the nature of the proven events, which remain unalterable for this Court since the ground allowing for their modification was dismissed, there is no doubt that they were committed as crimes against humanity, since the investigated illicit act occurred in a context of grave, massive, and systematic human rights violations, verified by State agents, with the victim in this case constituting an instrument within a general policy of exclusion, harassment, persecution, or extermination of a group of numerous people who, in the period immediately following September 11, 1973, were labeled as ideologically belonging to the deposed political regime or who, for any circumstance, were considered suspicious of opposing or hindering the realization of the social and political construction envisioned by those holding power, guaranteeing the perpetrators of said program impunity through non-interference in their methods, both by concealing the reality when ordinary courts of justice requested relevant reports, and by using state power to persuade local and foreign public opinion that the complaints filed to that effect were false and responded to a campaign aimed at discrediting the authoritarian military regime."

It adds: "Crimes against humanity are those injustices that not only contravene the legal interests commonly guaranteed by criminal laws, but at the same time imply a denial of the moral personality of man, such that for the configuration of this illicit act, there is an intimate connection between common crimes and an added value that stems from the disregard and contempt for the dignity of the person, because the main characteristic of this figure is the cruel way in which various criminal acts are perpetrated, which are in evident and manifest contradiction with the most basic concept of humanity; also highlighting the presence of cruelty toward a special class of individuals, thus combining an eminent intentional element, as a specific inner tendency of the agent's will."

"Ultimately, they constitute an outrage to human dignity and represent a grave and manifest violation of the rights and freedoms proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, reaffirmed and developed in other relevant international instruments."

In the judicial investigation and first-instance ruling, visiting judge Hernán Crisosto Greisse established that the kidnapped Teobaldo Tello was taken by his captors to the clandestine detention facility known as "Ollagüe," located at José Domingo Cañas No. 1367, in the commune of Ñuñoa, and subsequently transferred to the clandestine detention facilities of "Villa Grimaldi," located at Lo Arrieta No. 8200, in the commune of La Reina, and "Cuatro Álamos," located at Canadá street No. 3000, in Santiago, facilities that were controlled by the DINA.

During his stay at the José Domingo Cañas, Villa Grimaldi, and Cuatro Álamos barracks, he remained without contact with the outside world, blindfolded and tied, being continuously subjected to interrogations under torture by DINA agents for the purpose of obtaining information regarding members of the MIR, in order to proceed with the arrest of members of that organization.

In these facilities, Tello Garrido was seen by other surviving detainees with his arms and legs broken as a result of the torture. The last time he was seen alive was on an undetermined day in September 1974.

The name of Teobaldo Antonio Tello Garrido appeared on a list of 119 people, published in the national press after it appeared on a list published in the Argentine magazine "LEA," dated July 15, 1975, which stated that he had died in Argentina, along with 59 other people belonging to the MIR, due to internal strife among those members.

The aforementioned publications were the product of disinformation maneuvers carried out by the DINA, in what has become known as "Operation Colombo."

by Darío Núñez

Source: resumen.cl, September 22, 2023

Operation Colombo: Supreme Court sentences 30 former DINA agents for the 1975 aggravated kidnapping of a young MIR member

The Supreme Court sentenced agents of the dissolved Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA) for their responsibility in the consummated crime of aggravated kidnapping of Francisco Eduardo Ugás Morales, a 22-year-old student at the Instituto Superior de Comercio de Talca and a member of the Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (MIR), who was kidnapped starting on February 7, 1975, in the commune of Estación Central, in Santiago.

The name of Rodrigo Ugás appeared, subsequently, on the list of 119 forcibly disappeared persons included in the disinformation maneuver implemented by the DINA and the dictatorship known as "Operation Colombo."

In a unanimous ruling (case roll 63-094-2020), the Second Chamber of the high court—composed of justices Haroldo Brito, Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Jorge Dahm, justice María Teresa Letelier, and ad hoc lawyer Pía Tavolari—accepted the cassation appeals on the merits filed by the plaintiffs and established an error of law in the challenged sentence, issued by the Santiago Court of Appeals in April 2020, annulling and replacing it.

In the replacement sentence, the Supreme Court confirmed the first-instance sentence issued by Judge Hernán Crisosto Greisse in June 2015, which sentenced former Army officers and former DINA leaders Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko, and Raúl Eduardo Iturriaga Neumann to 13 years in prison as authors of the crime.

Meanwhile, former officers Rolf Gonzalo Wenderoth Pozo, Francisco Maximiliano Ferrer Lima, Fernando Eduardo Lauriani Maturana, Gerardo Ernesto Godoy García, and Manuel Andrés Carevic Cubillos, and former agents Pedro René Alfaro Fernández, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Luis René Torres Méndez, Hugo del Tránsito Hernández Valle, Manuel Rivas Díaz, Jerónimo del Carmen Neira Méndez, Carlos Eusebio López Inostroza, Luis Rigoberto Videla Insunza, Palmira Isabel Almuna Guzmán, Rafael de Jesús Riveros Frost, Leónidas Emiliano Méndez Moreno, Pedro Mora Villanueva, Osvaldo Octavio Castillo Arellano, Víctor Manuel Molina Astete, Fernando Enrique Guerra Guajardo, Rosa Humilde Ramos Hernández, José Abel Aravena Ruiz, Rodolfo Valentino Concha Rodríguez, Silvio Antonio Concha González, and Roberto Hernán Rodríguez Manquel must serve 10 years and one day in prison as co-authors of the aggravated kidnapping.

In the case of agent Samuel Enrique Fuenzalida Devia, the resolution of visiting judge Hernán Crisosto was confirmed, sentencing him to 541 days in prison, with the benefit of conditional remission of the sentence. At least 11 other agents sentenced in the first-instance ruling died during the course of the proceedings.

In the resolution, the Second Chamber establishes that: "....it is clear that the lower court judges, at the time of resolving the controversy submitted to their knowledge and acquitting the accused Fernando Eduardo Lauriani Maturana, Gerardo Ernesto Godoy García, Manuel Andrés Carevic Cubillos, Pedro René Alfaro Fernández, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Luis René Torres Méndez, Hugo del Tránsito Hernández Valle, Manuel Rivas Díaz, Jerónimo del Carmen Neira Méndez, Carlos López Inostroza, Luis Rigoberto Videla Insunza, Palmira Isabel Almuna Guzmán, Rafael de Jesús Riveros Frost, Leonidas Emiliano Méndez Moreno, Pedro Mora Villanueva, Víctor Manuel Molina Astete, and Fernando Enrique Guerra Guajardo, have incurred in the errors of law denounced by the plaintiff, by estimating, in summary, as evidenced by the reasoning that precedes, .... artificially reducing the responsibility attributed to each of them to their status as DINA agents, through an incomplete reproduction of the grounds put forward by the first-instance court…..", the ruling maintains.

"That on the other hand," it continues, "as has already been outlined, in addition to said legal qualification, the sentencers estimated.... that the facts were committed in a context of systematic or generalized attack against the civilian population, which determined that the established illicit act was, in addition, considered a crime against humanity, for violating ius cogens norms of International Humanitarian Law, and for the same reason, subjected to said international legal statute."

Villa Grimaldi

In the first-instance sentence, the visiting judge of the Santiago Court of Appeals, Hernán Crisosto Greisse, established that in the afternoon of February 7, 1975, members of the DINA arrested Rodrigo Eduardo Ugás Morales, a member of the Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (MIR), on a public street in the Estación Central sector of Santiago, and took him to the clandestine DINA detention facility known as 'Cuartel Terranova' or 'Villa Grimaldi', located at Lo Arrieta No. 8200, in the commune of La Reina, which was guarded by armed guards and to which only DINA agents had access.

During his stay at the Villa Grimaldi barracks, according to testimonies from survivors, the detainee Ugás Morales remained without contact with the outside world, blindfolded and tied, being continuously subjected to interrogations under torture by DINA agents operating in said barracks.

The last time Rodrigo Ugás Morales was seen by other detainees occurred on an undetermined day at the end of February 1975, and he has been missing since that date.

Source: resumen.cl, February 23, 2024

Operation Colombo: Supreme Court confirms sentences of 24 former DINA agents for the 1974 aggravated kidnapping of a UdeC leader in Santiago

The Supreme Court rejected the cassation appeals on form and merits filed by the defense against the sentence that convicted agents of the dissolved Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA) for their responsibility in the crime of aggravated kidnapping of sociology student Ariel Martín Salinas Argomedo, committed starting on September 25, 1974, in Santiago.

The name of Ariel Salinas Argomedo appeared, subsequently, on the list of 119 forcibly disappeared persons included in the disinformation maneuver implemented by the DINA and the dictatorship known as "Operation Colombo."

In a unanimous ruling (case roll 135.568-2020), the Second Chamber of the high court—composed of justices Haroldo Brito, Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Jorge Dahm, justice María Teresa Letelier, and ad hoc lawyer Pía Tavolari—accepted the cassation appeal on form filed by the plaintiff, the Human Rights Program of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, and consequently invalidated the challenged sentence only in the part that acquitted the accused Manuel Heriberto Avendaño González and, in a replacement sentence, sentenced him to 10 years in prison as an author of the crime.

The Supreme Court's ruling confirmed the sentences of former Army officers and former DINA leaders César Raúl Manríquez Bravo, Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko, and Raúl Eduardo Iturriaga Neumann, who must serve 13 years in prison for their responsibility as authors of the aggravated kidnapping.

Meanwhile, in addition to the aforementioned Manuel Heriberto Avendaño González, former officers Francisco Maximiliano Ferrer Lima, Fernando Eduardo Lauriani Maturana, Manuel Andrés Carevic Cubillos, Gerardo Ernesto Godoy García, and Palmira Isabel Almuna Guzmán, and former agents Hermón Helec Alfaro Mundaca, Julio José Hoyos Zegarra, Silvio Antonio Concha González, José Alfonso Ojeda Obando, Luis Rigoberto Videla Inzunza, Teresa del Carmen Osorio Navarro, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, José Abel Aravena Ruiz, Alejandro Francisco Astudillo Adonis, Rosa Humilde Ramos Hernández, Pedro René Alfaro Fernández, Raúl Juan Rodríguez Ponte, Pedro Ariel Araneda Araneda, and Juan Evaristo Duarte Gallegos must serve 10 years of imprisonment, all convicted as authors of the crime.

12 other agents, also convicted in the first-instance ruling issued by Judge Hernán Crisosto Greisse in October 2015, died during the course of the proceedings.

Regarding the case of the accused Manuel Avendaño González, the Criminal Chamber points out: "(...) under such conditions, the appeal proposed by the Human Rights Program of the relevant Ministry must be accepted, since from the mere reading of the challenged sentence, grounds are evident that are completely contradictory, canceling each other out, making the decision that acquits the accused Avendaño González, which is declared in the operative part, devoid of any foundation, thus configuring the vice of invalidation denounced."

"Indeed, at the time of the events, these accused were part, as hierarchical superiors and operational agents, together with other defendants whose participation would be analyzed in the following considerations, of the groups belonging to the Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional that carried out the kidnapping of members of the Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria, among whose members was Salinas Argomedo, in such a way that, despite not remembering the specific name of this person, it is indisputable to conclude, just as the a quo does, that they took part in his illegitimate deprivation of liberty immediately and directly in the manner provided by the aforementioned norm and that, for the same reason, they are punishable co-authors of this illicit act."

Operation Colombo

Ariel Martín Salinas Argomedo was a former sociology student at the Universidad de Concepción. The 26-year-old, married and father of a daughter, was a member of the Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (MIR), was part of the MIR university leadership in Concepción, and, until the military coup, was president of the student center for the sociology program at the UdeC.

After the coup, he had to go into hiding to avoid being arrested. He moved to Santiago to continue his militant activity and a year later was arrested.

In the first-instance ruling, special judge Hernán Crisosto Greisse established that in the morning of September 25, 1974, Ariel Salinas was arrested on a public street by agents belonging to the Dirección Nacional de Inteligencia (DINA), who took him to the clandestine DINA detention facility known as 'Ollagüe', located at José Domingo Cañas No. 1367 in the commune of Ñuñoa.

Subsequently, he was taken to the clandestine detention facilities known as 'Villa Grimaldi', located at Lo Arrieta No. 8200, in La Reina, and 'Cuatro Álamos', located at Canadá street No. 3000, in the commune of Santiago, facilities that were guarded by armed guards and to which only DINA agents had access.

According to the testimony of surviving prisoners, during his stay at the José Domingo Cañas, Villa Grimaldi, and Cuatro Álamos barracks, the detainee Ariel Salinas remained without contact with the outside world. In the first two places, he was blindfolded and tied, being continuously subjected to interrogations under torture by DINA agents operating in said barracks.

The last time Ariel Salinas Argomedo was seen alive by other detainees occurred on an undetermined day in November 1974, and he has been missing since that date.

by Darío Núñez

Source: resumen.cl, February 26, 2024