161. Next to speak was lawyer Julio Roberto Echeverria on behalf of Captain Lima Oliva.  Echeverria argued that the evidence did not even meet the basic requirements for an accusation, let alone a guilty finding. The Captain’s alibi was that he was out until 11:00 pm with a group of military friends on the night of the murder.  The fact that another EMP witness had said that the Captain was out until 10:00 pm is determinative of nothing, because no one could really remember the exact time involved. He stated that it was impossible to believe that the Captain, who had returned from a very long trip that same day would then be required to participate in something like a murder.

162.  Again the evidence of Chanax Sontay was attacked. Echeverria stated that the night of the murder, Chanax Sontay had approached the police and said that he had information to offer, behaviour which did not correspond with the picture painted by the prosecution of Sontay as someone who was intimidated and afraid to initially offer information.  Again the inconsistencies with regard to Sontay’s previous statements were noted.  In particular, it was two years after the crime that Sontay recalled seeing a shirtless man outside the Parish house and this recollection followed another witness’s similar testimony.

163. Moreover, it was strange that Sontay could know the full name of a Colonel but that after all the time that he claimed to have been providing information to the Colonel about the Bishop’s movements, he was not able to remember the phone number that he was supposed to call. He also noted that Sontay was a drug addict and that it was difficult to believe that the Colonel would have contracted Sontay as an agent in this kind of condition.

164. Echeverria also said that the crime scene was not well guarded and it was impossible not to believe that it had been contaminated.

165. The next lawyer represented Abdulio Villanueva. Villanueva’s lawyer reviewed his client’s alibi which was simply that he was a prisoner in jail at the time of the murder.  He noted that Sontay’s original testimony was not enough to have Villanueva charged with the crime. The lawyer questioned why if Villanueva had broken out of jail to be involved with the crime he would not have fled afterwards, as opposed to returning to the jail.  He also noted that Villanueva’s parents had testified that they had visited him in the jail and that they had registered in the visitor’s book at the jail during the time that he was alleged to have been out of jail. Villanueva’s lawyer also said that it would have been impossible to leave the jail without a special key.

166. The lawyer for the ex-military specialist also stated that there were no other homeless people who had seen any military presence whatsoever before the crime, and the one witness, Chanax Sontay,  who said he saw Villanueva actually filming the re-arranging of the crime scene after the Bishop’s assassination, was drugged up at the time.  With regard to Chanax Sontay’s he argued that it was obviously in Sontay’s interest to testify because when he appeared in court it was obvious that he had been living well and had new shoes and clothes etc. This lawyer finished his argument by quoting from Josef Goebbels, the Nazi director of propaganda who apparently at one point stated “lie, lie, lie, until the lie becomes the truth.” His purpose in quoting Goebbels was to argue that the military accused’s only crime was having been in the Guatemalan Army and that the prosecution’s case was based upon lies which had been told so often as to be believed.

167. The final closing argument came from lawyer Jose Toledo Paz, representing Father Mario Orantes. The priest’s position was essentially that he had slept through the murder and was asleep in his room inside the San Sebastian parish house.  Paz pointed out that the murder was so brutal as to have been impossible for his client to carry out.  He also noted that the Bishop was the priest’s mentor and that the priest would often cover for the Bishop on duties around the Church.  He noted that there was no criminal motive underlying Orantes’ alleged involvement and he reviewed the various theories that had already been discarded including the original theory of the murder having been a crime of passion somehow involving a type of homosexual relationship between the priest and the Bishop. He further noted that Orantes had been the first to collaborate with all the authorities. 

168. The testimony of Chanax Sontay was again called into question.  The lawyer stated that Sontay was lying when he testified that he had rung the bell and that Orantes had appeared and then kicked the door shut. 

169. With regard to the evidence that indicated the last internet log-on time had been around 10:11 pm, Paz indicated that the computer had been left on while a program was downloading from the internet.  The fact that the computer log indicated 10:11 pm was not in any way determinative of when the priest actually fell asleep or went to bed. 

170. Paz argued that it was entirely possible that Orantes may not have heard the Bishop come in or the murder. An audio specialist had found that, given the 25 metres from the garage to Orantes’ bedroom, it was not always possible to hear the cars from the priest’s room. 

171. In order to find the priest guilty of extra-judicial execution it would have to be proven that he was somehow involved with the other intellectual authors of the crime. There was no proof like this. Paz also called into question the Luminol test that had found blood in Orantes’ bedroom.  He noted that the crime scene was contaminated and that blood was found in various places in San Sebastian Church.  He also noted that for whoever committed the crime, it was not necessary to involve the Priest, and that attempting to do so would be a risky proposition for those who wanted to assassinate the Bishop. Why involve Orantes when the murderer could have just broken in or jumped the fence?

172. Finally, Paz argued that the change of charge from assassination to extra-judicial execution eliminated any non-political motive for the murder.  What then was then Orantes’ political motive, especially when he shared the same ideological background as Gerardi?

173.  Paz said that Orantes had been out of the country during part of the investigation and the opportunity had existed to flee the jurisdiction but instead the Priest had returned in order to face trial and clear his name. This was not the behaviour of a murderer or accomplice.

174.  The trial broke for lunch and reconvened at 2pm.

175. After the close of final arguments for the defendants, the Prosecution was given an opportunity to rebut which was turned down.  This obviously meant that there was no sur-rebuttal from the defence lawyers. 

176. One unique feature of Guatemalan law is that each of the accused has the ability to make a final statement themselves.  This statement is not considered to be testimony or evidence.  It is merely an opportunity to speak.  It was not known whether the accused were going to avail themselves of the opportunity to make a statement, as none of them had testified in their own defence.  However, all of them gave a brief final statement. 

177. That afternoon, Abdulio Villanueva, Margarita Lopez, Colonel Lima Estrada, and Priest Mario Orantes each made brief statements professing their innocence.  The court then adjourned with the remaining final statement to be made by Captain Lima Oliva.  The adjournment may have been  somewhat of a surprise to some, as there was plenty of time left in the day for the Captain to give his statement.

178. However, under Guatemalan law, the judges are obliged to bring in their sentence within  24 hours of the termination of the formal proceeding. By adjourning with one small piece of the proceeding remaining, the judges bought themselves several hours of time which presumably would help them in completing their written decision.

June 7, 2001 at 9:00 am. 

179. That morning I noticed that the presiding Judge on the Panel,  Eduardo Cojolun was wearing a bulletproof vest (he may have been the entire time). The Captain appeared dressed in his full military regalia complete with numerous decorations and medals. He started his concluding statements by stating that it is a sad time in history when a person like himself who has given himself to his country is accused on trumped up charges. The Captain said that he had not been involved in any kind of extra-judicial execution of Monsignor Gerardi and that Gerardi had been a person that he had admired for a long time.  The Captain also likened himself to Jesus stating that Jesus had told the truth and like Jesus the Captain had come to the Court to tell the truth.  He stated that he had not testified at the trial because previous Judges had advised him to not go into as much detail when his life was at stake (I was unclear what this statement meant exactly).

180. The Captain reviewed the medals on his uniform, stating that not only were some of his medals for valour, but there were also medals which had been given to him in conjunction with the Peace Accords.  The Captain noted that he had a bright future in the army and that he had been serving as a peacekeeper in Cypress.   He questioned why he would throw away his career when he had such a bright future.

181. The Captain then turned his attention away from the judicial panel and towards the prosecuting lawyers. He claimed that ODHAG was on a mission of vengeance against the military and that the Public Ministry Fiscales had gone along with their game.  He stated that it was sad that after five (5) years of peace that the prosecuting lawyers wanted continue the war.  He also called the prosecuting lawyers “comprarles”, stating that the Fiscales had been paid in U.S. dollars to take the case.  He noted that the Public Ministry had also taken the case for personal fame and in order to get the backing of the international community.  The Captain talked about the suffering of his family and the fact that he had been separated from his daughter since he had been in jail for the last year and a half. 

182. With regard to the ODHAG lawyers, the Captain said that while they were good lawyers they had no personal integrity. The Captain also addressed his comments to the international community asking to “please stop all that you are doing and that if the international community is going to assist by coming to Guatemala please do something for the progress of the country”.  He then cryptically said that the problems of Europe should be solved by Europeans and that the problems of Guatemala should be solved by Guatemalans.

183. The Judges then asked if there was anyone in the courtroom who had anything more to say about the death of Monsignor Gerardi.  No one spoke. The Judges then announced that their decision would be rendered at 11:30 in the evening.

June 7, 2001 11:30 pm

184. I returned to the Courthouse at approximately 8:30pm in anticipation of a packed house for the verdict. The courtroom, which held upwards of 500 people, filled quickly and we waited for the 11:30 pm session. There was a media frenzy-taking place in the courtroom and it appeared that the police forces providing Courtroom security had no interest in restraining the mob of reporters, photographers and camera operators. Generally security at the court was tight.  There was a metal detector, bag search and hands-on frisk at the entrance of the court building, followed by a metal detector, bag search, hands-on frisk and passport number registration at the entrance to the Courtroom itself.

185. The accused were brought into the Courtroom at about 11:00 pm and the media immediately swarmed them, engulfing them in an unrestricted melee of microphones and camera flashes. The accused’s lawyers were nowhere to be seen.  The Captain again appeared in uniform, this time in full military dress uniform with a formal military jacket.  His father, the Colonel, was dressed in a black shirt and jacket with a large silver cross which had the effect of making him look like a priest.  The Priest himself was wearing his collar which he had been wearing for the past few days of the trial but apparently not at any point before that.  In fact on the day of the trial that corresponded with the anniversary of the death of the Bishop, Orantes had worn pyjamas to court. 

186. At 11:30 pm the judges did not arrive.  After a long wait, at 2:00 am (June 8, 2001) the defence lawyers gathered in front of the media cameras and stated that for them the long wait for the judges was unacceptable. They criticized the Judges for unprofessional behaviour and they made some kind of statement to the effect that the presence of the U.S. Ambassador, Prudence Bushnell, in the gallery was somehow associated with the delay.  I found it quite astounding for a group of lawyers to criticize the body that was just about to make a decision with regard to the fate of their clients, but it appeared that by that point the defence lawyers knew that the verdict was going to go against them and were playing to the “court of public opinion”. After making this statement, the defence lawyers then walked out of the proceeding.

187. Mike Flynn confirmed that their statement was consistent with the way they had been generally trying to portray the trial. The defence lawyers claimed that the proceedings were somehow being controlled by international interests, in particular American interests, and that their clients were somehow political sacrifices to a process desired by the Americans.

188. At approximately 2:30 am the clerk of the court came in and announced that the delay was due to technical problems.

189. At 3:00 am I noticed that Captain Lima Oliva had actually moved up into the gallery and was talking with one of his friends who was a Major in the EMP.  I was again concerned by the lack of security within the room even though the perimeter of the room was again surrounded by police officers. Shortly after this I had a conversation with Francisco Goldman the Guatemalan/American writer who had done an article on the Gerardi case for the New Yorker.  Goldman told me that he thought that the Priest might be found not guilty based on what he knew of the evidence.  

190. At 4:20 am the Judges arrived in the courtroom.  The presiding Judge apologized for the lateness of their arrival and mentioned again something to do with technical problems that they had experienced in producing the written decision.  In conducting the usual roll call, the absence of the lawyers for the defendants was noted. The presiding Judge indicated that the decision was approximately two hundred and fifty (250) pages long and gave the option to the lawyers present as to whether they wanted the entire decision read or the conclusions only.  The Fiscales asked for the conclusions only and of course the defence lawyers were absent and thus no opinion was expressed on behalf of the defence. As the clerk of the court began to read the conclusions, the defence lawyers returned and sat at the table in front of their clients to hear the verdict. 

191. I am in the process of obtaining the actual decision in Spanish, however the following is a very brief and incomplete summary of the Judges’ conclusions.  Generally the Judges accepted the political motive and held that the murder of the Bishop was a crime of the state.  There was no evidence against the cook Margarita Lopez and she was absolved of the charges against her.  The judges found that the testimony of Chanax Sontay was credible, a key tenet in finding the military accused and Orantes guilty. Generally the decision accepts the Prosecution’s theory of the case.  The three military accused were found guilty of extra-judicial execution and were sentenced to thirty (30) years in prison.  The Priest, Mario Orantes, was found guilty of being an accomplice to the murder and he received  twenty (20) years in prison.  The Judges also held that the investigation would remain open with regard to thirteen (13) other people who had been implicated. 

192. Even though it was not determined that the four convicted were involved directly in the act of murdering the Bishop, their participation as co-authors in planning and contributing in the execution using resources of the state indicated that they had acted as intellectual authors of the crime. 

193. In addition to the 30-year sentence, Captain Lima Oliva also received a two (2) year sentence for falsification of documents. 

194. The immediate reaction in the courtroom was subdued.  The Prosecuting lawyers immediately left the Courtroom for security reasons. I noticed on my way out that there were several people who were in tears, including Helen Mack, the Human Rights Activist from the Myrna Mack Foundation who I would be meeting formally later in the day.