182 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HON. OLIVER W. WANGER J. DOE, ) No. CIV-F-03-6249 OWW ) Plaintiff, ) Plaintiff's Application for ) Judgment by Default vs. ) ) ALVARO RAFAEL SARAVIA; and ) DOES 1-10, inclusive, ) ) Defendants. ) ) Fresno, California Wednesday, August 25, 2004 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS Vol. 2, pgs. 182 to 285, inclusive REPORTED BY: PEGGY J. CRAWFORD, RMR-CRR, Official Reporter 183 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: For the Plaintiff: HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & MCAULIFFE LLP 333 Bush Street San Francisco, CA 94104-2878 BY: NICHOLAS W. van AELSTYN RUSSELL P. COHEN CENTER FOR JUSTICE & ACCOUNTABILITY 870 Market Street, Ste. 684 San Francisco, CA 94102 BY: MATTHEW J. EISENBRANDT CAROLYN PATTY BLUM Also Present: ALMUNDENA BERNABEU 184 INDEX PLAINTIFF'S WITNESSES: AMBASSADOR ROBERT WHITE (By Deposition) 185 ATILIO RAMIREZ AMAYA 204 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. EISENBRANDT 204 TERRY LYNN KARL 242 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. van AELSTYN 242 ***** EXHIBITS PLAINTIFF'S Marked 221 242 ***** PLAINTIFF'S Received 119, 120, 121, 122, 124 194 127 and 132 195 128 196 42 214 113 216 115 219 ***** 185 1 Wednesday, August 25, 2004 Fresno, California 2 9:00 a.m. 3 THE COURT: Good morning. We are going to go back on 4 the record in Doe versus Saravia. 5 Mr. Van Aelstyn, you may proceed. 6 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. We would 7 like to continue with the videotaped deposition testimony of 8 Ambassador Robert White. 9 THE COURT: Yes, you may. 10 AMBASSADOR ROBERT WHITE, 11 called as a witness on behalf of the Plaintiff by way of 12 videotaped deposition presented testimony to the Court.) 13 (Discussion was had off the record regarding 14 coordinating the deposition exhibits with the default hearing 15 exhibits.) 16 MR. Van AELSTYN: Your Honor, that concludes the 17 videotaped testimony of Ambassador Robert White. 18 Based upon his testimony, I would like to move into 19 evidence several of the documents that he discussed and 20 identified during his videotaped deposition. 21 I suggest addressing them in different groupings, as 22 they were similar kinds of documents that he authenticated and 23 identified. 24 The first -- there are two groups. The first are 25 those declassified State Department documents that he 186 1 identified. And they are Trial Exhibit Number 119, which was 2 the working group memo that he spoke about before he went to 3 El Salvador as Ambassador. And then several cables from El 4 Salvador when he was U.S. Ambassador there, and they are Trial 5 Exhibit Numbers 120, 121, 122, 127, 124 and 132. 6 THE COURT: Now, these documents are communiqués from 7 the Ambassador of the United States to the country of El 8 Salvador. Are they being offered as official records? Are 9 they being offered for the truth of the contents? They 10 certainly reflect the witness' state of mind relative to 11 action that was or was not being taken. 12 I think almost all of it is post assassination. I 13 don't remember any of them. He talks about his 14 pre-assassination knowledge and meeting with the Archbishop. 15 But the documents reflect, and I assume the purpose 16 that they are being offered is twofold: One purpose would be 17 to show the unavailability of legal remedies that existed from 18 the time of the assassination to sometime as yet unestablished 19 in the future. 20 And then the second purpose would be to try to assign 21 responsibility through either the Ambassador's opinions or the 22 opinions of others that the Ambassador has collected, all of 23 which are double and triple hearsay or more. 24 And so I need for you to tell me specifically under 25 what theories of the law of evidence you believe and for what 187 1 purposes the documents are admissible. 2 MR. Van AELSTYN: Yes, your Honor. First, I would 3 like to make one clarification. Two of the documents, the 4 declassified State Department documents were 5 pre-assassination. And they were Exhibit Numbers 119, which 6 was the working group memo that he worked on before going to 7 El Salvador, and 132, which was the cable from Ambassador 8 White to the Secretary of State, dated March 19, 1980, which 9 contains his assessment of the situation prior to the 10 assassination of Romero. 11 And I'm sorry, I omitted one additional document, 12 which was Exhibit Number 128, which was the English 13 translation of the Saravia diary. 14 To address the evidentiary basis for moving them into 15 evidence, first of all, with regard to the purpose for moving 16 them into evidence, the purpose for which we seek to use them 17 is indeed twofold. And you did identify them. 18 One is to show the lack of legal recourse in El 19 Salvador, and two, is to provide evidence of the 20 responsibility for the crime itself, some of which is a little 21 more direct than others. Some speaks more to the context in 22 which these events took place and makes them understandable on 23 the events that did take place and for which we seek to hold 24 the defendant responsible. 25 THE COURT: It seems to me that the first ground, 188 1 lack of legal recourse, that the evaluation by the Ambassador, 2 the working group, would be expressions of the states of minds 3 of policy makers charged with reporting on the circumstances 4 that then existed, and would be admissible for the fact that 5 all of that material was discussed and gathered, not 6 necessarily for its truth and for the underlying hearsay 7 opinions that are on top of the Ambassador's opinion. 8 Certainly, and this gets into very complex law, 9 whether, in his deposition he is an authorized witness on 10 behalf of the United States to express a government opinion 11 about conditions is something that has not been addressed by 12 any submission that the plaintiff has made. 13 And I believe that the fact that the reports were 14 being made and the comments were communicated is evidence of 15 itself that may be then corroborated by other evidence that 16 you have, but without the further foundation, I don't believe 17 there is a legally supported basis for the submission of the 18 underlying opinions, if you will, or other data for its truth 19 because of the multiple layers of hearsay. 20 MR. Van AELSTYN: I understand, your Honor. Let me 21 address first the authentication and admissibility of the 22 documents, if I may, and then address the issue of the levels 23 of hearsay and the degree of reliability of the information 24 contained in these documents and what they can be relied upon 25 for. 189 1 First, with regard to authentication, these are -- we 2 believe that these are exceptions -- that these are 3 admissible -- strike that. 4 These are authenticated documents under the Federal 5 Rules of Evidence, sections number 901(7) and 901(8) in that 6 they are both public record documents. They are all 7 maintained in the business of the Department of State, both at 8 the Embassy and at Washington D.C. Therefore, they are 9 purported public records and they were, as Professor Karl will 10 testify later to the process of their declassification, we 11 will hear more about that process, but we do know that they 12 were maintained by the Department of State and, as such, 13 constitute public records under the Federal Rules of Evidence 14 901(7). 15 In addition, they also do qualify for authentication 16 under the ancient document doctrine of Federal Rules of 17 Evidence section 901(8), in parens, sub 8. 18 They were, again, as Professor Karl will testify, 19 released in 1993, I believe it was the exact year, shortly 20 after the Truth Commission Report was issued. They were 21 released by a special initiative taken in Washington D.C. to 22 declassify a number of documents relating to El Salvador. 23 These were released as part of that process. They 24 have now been identified and authenticated additionally by 25 Ambassador White, who had personal knowledge of those 190 1 documents at the time they were prepared. 2 In addition, we believe that they are admissible -- 3 THE COURT: All right. Let me just ask one more 4 question. And that is, that as to the subsection 8, Rule of 5 Evidence, 901, Ancient Document Or Data Compilation, the law 6 specifically provides: 7 "Evidence that a document or data compilation in any 8 form is in such condition as to create no suspicion 9 concerning its authenticity or was in a place where, 10 if authentic, it would likely be, and has been in 11 existence 20 years or more at the time it is 12 offered." 13 I'm satisfied that those specific requirements are 14 met. And that at least the two exhibits you refer to are 15 authentic in the sense that you don't need and you are not 16 offering a certified copy of these documents, which would be a 17 separate ground for authentication. 18 So I will find as a matter of law that the documents 19 are authentic. So now we move to the issue of admissibility. 20 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. With regard 21 to admissibility, we believe that they are admissible, again, 22 under both the ancient document doctrine, which is set forth 23 in Federal Rules of Evidence 803(16) and again, the public 24 record doctrine set forth in the Federal Rules of Evidence 25 section 803(8). 191 1 Again, these are documents that have been in 2 existence for 20 years or more and, as we have just 3 established, their authenticity has been established; 4 therefore, under the ancient document doctrine, they are 5 admissible, we contend. I think it's pretty clear, and under 6 the public record doctrine of 803(8), they are documents that 7 have been maintained in the normal course of business by the 8 United States Department of State. 9 Finally, they are records of regularly conducted 10 activity by the Department of State, which further qualifies 11 them for admission under Federal Rules of Evidence rule 803(6) 12 in that they are -- 13 THE COURT: Unfortunately, the foundation sometimes 14 known colloquially as the "business records exception" wasn't 15 laid. In other words, he's not the custodian. He didn't 16 testify those records were made at or near the time that they 17 were recorded, that they were maintained reliably in the 18 course of the business of the State Department, and although 19 we might be able to infer that, that foundation simply isn't 20 there. So I think we are going to have to focus on the public 21 record and report exception and the ancient document 22 exception. 23 MR. Van AELSTYN: All right, your Honor. Yes, he did 24 authenticate them as to their promulgation and did testify 25 that they were part of his normal course of communications 192 1 with Washington, but with regard to the maintenance of the 2 records, you are right, he did not. 3 THE COURT: Which subsection 6 requires, but I think 4 you have shown sufficient, and I will find under the Public 5 Records and Reports, that records, reports, statements or data 6 compilations in any form of public offices or agencies setting 7 forth the activities of the office or agency or matters 8 observed pursuant to duty imposed by law as to which matters 9 there was a duty to report excluding in criminal cases matters 10 observed by police officers or in civil actions and 11 proceedings and against the government, and that subsection 12 doesn't apply. 13 So I will find that the only applicable section is 14 803(8)(A), that these are authentic records, statements or 15 reports by the United States Embassy for the country of El 16 Salvador and that they were generated at the time in a 17 reliable way, so as we can find that these are true records 18 and, therefore, admissible under subsection (8)(A) only. 19 That's the only exception that that rule of evidence meets. 20 And under the ancient document exception, statements 21 in a document in existence 20 years or more, the authenticity 22 of which is established, is also satisfied. 23 So that we can be clear, that gets the report into 24 evidence. To the extent that there are opinions of others, 25 that there is other information for which there are yet other 193 1 rules of evidence that apply, I don't express any opinion now, 2 because you have to go line by line, quite frankly, through 3 the report, but for the purpose that you are offering it, you 4 can tie that up when we get to the application of evidence to 5 the legal requirements later in the case. 6 MR. Van AELSTYN: Yes, your Honor, thank you. That 7 is precisely what we will do. We will provide testimony 8 interpreting, as you note, the levels of hearsay set forth 9 that is contained in the information contained in these 10 documents. We believe that there are ways in which to 11 interpret that information in order to ascertain facts from 12 the collection of documents. 13 Just to be clear, then, as to which documents the 14 Court has found admissible on these grounds that we have just 15 been discussing, does this then cover all of those which I 16 identified at the beginning or shall I run down the list 17 again? 18 THE COURT: I think that we need to refer 19 specifically to each one. I intended the Ambassador's 20 communiqués to be covered by this, and that was, to my 21 understanding, 119, 132 -- and was 128 also a communiqué? 22 MR. Van AELSTYN: No, your Honor, 128 was the English 23 translation of the diary. 24 THE COURT: That's an entirely separate matter, so 25 119 and 132. 194 1 MR. Van AELSTYN: Actually, if I may clarify for one 2 moment, 119 was the working group memo prepared prior to going 3 to El Salvador. That was a Department of State internal 4 memorandum. 5 THE COURT: It would still be a report of a public 6 agency, regularly conducted, and it's more than 20 years old. 7 MR. Van AELSTYN: Yes, your Honor. 8 THE COURT: I'm satisfied that that's satisfied. 9 What are 120, 121 and 122? 10 MR. Van AELSTYN: Each of these is a cable from 11 Ambassador White to Washington. 12 THE COURT: 120 through 124, all of those will be 13 admitted. They are in evidence. 14 MR. Van AELSTYN: Your Honor, I believe, just for 15 accuracy, Exhibit 123 was the original Saravia diary. 16 THE COURT: Then 123 and 128 need to be handled 17 together separate. So it's 120 through 122, 124 are received 18 in evidence. 19 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. If I may, 20 just to make sure we are on the same page, 119, which is the 21 working group memo. 22 THE COURT: Yes. 23 MR. Van AELSTYN: And 120, 121, 122, 124. 24 THE COURT: Yes, all of those are in evidence. 25 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 119, 120, 121, 122, 124 were 195 1 received.) 2 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. And also 3 127 and 132, which also are cables. 4 THE COURT: Those are received in evidence under the 5 same rules of evidence. 6 (Plaintiff's Exhibits 127 and 132 were received.) 7 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. The three, 8 then, that we have left that Ambassador White discussed during 9 his deposition that have not been admitted into evidence at 10 this time, are Exhibit Numbers 123, which is the original 11 Saravia diary. 12 THE COURT: In Spanish? 13 MR. Van AELSTYN: In Spanish. Exhibit number 128, 14 which is the English translation of that diary. And 125, 15 which was the report of the Salvadoran official who 16 conducted -- who reported on the May 7, 1980 raid on the San 17 Luis Finca. 18 THE COURT: Now, let's take these separately. Before 19 deciding the admissibility of the diary, the English 20 translation, as I understand it, was accomplished by embassy 21 staff. 22 MR. Van AELSTYN: That is what Ambassador White 23 testified. 24 THE COURT: We don't have anybody here to contest the 25 accuracy and the integrity of the translation. And I don't 196 1 speak or read Spanish, so I can't do it, and I don't think 2 that it would be productive to engage the Court's interpreter 3 to do that, if you represent to the Court that the Spanish 4 language has been independently, the translation of it, 5 independently checked and verified for accuracy. 6 MR. Van AELSTYN: I can make that representation, 7 your Honor. 8 THE COURT: All right. Then if 123 is admissible, we 9 will admit 128 as an accurate and fair translation of 123. 10 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 128 was received.) 11 THE COURT: As to 125, the report, what I understand, 12 if I'm correct, this came from a military officer to the 13 Embassy, the Ambassador. 14 MR. Van AELSTYN: No, your Honor. It was a document 15 prepared by a Salvadoran military officer reporting on the 16 action taken on May 7, 1980, by elements of the Salvadoran 17 military, which Roberto D'Aubuisson, Alvaro Saravia and others 18 were arrested. 19 THE COURT: But did not this not somehow become 20 transmitted to the Ambassador's office? 21 MR. Van AELSTYN: Yes, your Honor, it did. 22 THE COURT: I don't know whether it was from Colonel 23 Majano or had came from some other officer. 24 MR. Van AELSTYN: I had understood Ambassador White 25 to testify it came from Colonel Majano. 197 1 THE COURT: All right. Then it is a report not 2 prepared by the -- it is not a public report or record of the 3 United States. But it is a document that was received by the 4 Embassy in the capacity of its official conduct of its 5 statutory mission in El Salvador, and I will let you 6 provide -- it occurs that, in terms of reliability and 7 authenticity, there could or could not be motives for an 8 accurate report of the arrest to be made. 9 The fact of the arrests is probably a matter that 10 would be, if the information were provided, judicially 11 noticeable, if it was sufficiently publicized within the 12 country of El Salvador at the time. 13 And I'm willing to consider the document for the fact 14 of the arrests and that that action was taken, but beyond 15 that, I think we would have to have other exceptions under the 16 law of evidence to permit anything else to be received for its 17 truth. 18 MR. Van AELSTYN: Understood, your Honor. That's the 19 sole basis upon which we are offering it. 20 THE COURT: All right. Well, then I will receive 21 Exhibit 125 for the limited purpose to show that the fact of 22 arrests by the Salvador junta were made of D'Aubuisson, 23 Saravia and other of their colleagues on or about the 9th of 24 May of 1980. 25 MR. Van AELSTYN: 7th of May. 198 1 THE COURT: 7th of May of 1980. 2 MR. Van AELSTYN: All right, that brings us to the 3 last document. 4 THE COURT: The Saravia diary. 5 MR. Van AELSTYN: And I wanted to point out one 6 additional fact about this. Well, first, the Saravia diary 7 that has been identified as Trial Exhibit Number 123 is the 8 one which was obtained from the United States Department of 9 State, and it's actually available on the State's web site, 10 and that is the version that Ambassador White reviewed and 11 testified about during his deposition. 12 Another copy of the Saravia diary has been submitted. 13 Declaration -- the declaration by Todd Greentree, which is in 14 the binder, the witness list binder under tab 27, is a 15 declaration authenticating a version of the diary, which Todd 16 Greentree, who at the time was a staff member of the United 17 States Embassy in El Salvador, testifies that he obtained this 18 copy of the Saravia diary at that time. I won't summarize the 19 declaration further, except to point out that there are two 20 versions of the diary. 21 And Professor Karl, this afternoon, will testify a 22 bit about the version of the diary that Todd Greentree -- 23 THE COURT: Maybe we ought to reserve the ruling then 24 until that testimony is received and I have a chance to read 25 the Greentree declaration. 199 1 MR. Van AELSTYN: I appreciate that, your Honor. I 2 just wanted to flag the issue, that there are two different 3 bases. 4 THE COURT: Yes. 5 MR. Van AELSTYN: The basis for Exhibit Number 123 is 6 that it has been maintained by the United States Department of 7 State, and Ambassador White did identify it as such. 8 And we believe that it is admissible on the same 9 grounds as 125, which is to say, it is a document obtained by 10 the United States Embassy in the course of its business, not 11 generated by the United States Embassy, but obtained by the 12 United States Embassy as part of its business and then 13 maintained by it in its public records. 14 THE COURT: And what I am concerned about is this. 15 The exact circumstances in which it came into the possession 16 of the agency, from whom it was delivered, what the, quite 17 frankly, the position, status, the motive of the person 18 delivering it, whether or not that would have any effect on 19 its authenticity, and its reliability, because, in other 20 words, I'm not being frivolous when I suggest this, but: 21 Saravia is my enemy. He killed a member of my family in El 22 Salvador. And I then write out a diary in Spanish and I cause 23 that, through some channel, to be delivered to the U.S. 24 Embassy with the hope that some action will be taken against 25 Saravia. 200 1 So if we are offering this as an admission of 2 Saravia, we have got a major problem with foundation. Because 3 you have got to link it to Saravia. The handwriting would 4 have to be identified. A witness would have to say, "I took 5 the," if you will, "diary from his person or immediate 6 presence. I was a member of the search team." The normal 7 means of identification. As in any criminal case, to try to, 8 if you are going to use it as an admission against penal or 9 civil interest, you have got to have -- the fact it's in the 10 hands of the United States Embassy doesn't authenticate that 11 it's Saravia's. 12 MR. Van AELSTYN: Understood, your Honor. I will 13 represent at this time that there is a wealth of evidence 14 concerning how that document was obtained during the action on 15 May 7, 1980, at the San Luis Finca, at which Saravia and 16 others were arrested by the junta and it was found at that 17 time in their possession, less than two months after the 18 assassination of Archbishop Romero. 19 THE COURT: How is it that there are two versions? 20 MR. Van AELSTYN: Let me be clear. They are not 21 different in substance. They are different photocopies. The 22 only substantive difference, and it's not substantive, is the 23 organization of the pages. You may have noticed, and I will 24 point, the one issue that is of most relevance, the Operation 25 Piña page that Ambassador White discussed. 201 1 In the copy of the diary maintained by the Department 2 of State, that page has been inserted, in effect, into the 3 diary. Because you will notice it's not on the same -- it's 4 not a calendar page, it doesn't have the date on it. It's a 5 separate piece of paper that's been inserted into the middle 6 of it. 7 Todd Greentree testifies that those separate pages 8 were with the diary, but not inserted into the diary. It was 9 a short stack of documents, in effect, that were gathered 10 together. 11 That's the only difference between these copies, is 12 where the page has been placed in the stack of documents. 13 THE COURT: And so from that, the most evident 14 inference that is drawn is that the plan, if you will, or the 15 Piña page is separate from the diary and not a part of the 16 diary. 17 MR. Van AELSTYN: Not a part of the diary -- 18 THE COURT: Not an integrated page. 19 MR. Van AELSTYN: It is there, but as with many 20 people, there are slips of paper in the diary and the 21 understanding of Todd Greentree and others is that they were 22 collected at one time. 23 THE COURT: Does Mr. Greentree say the source of the 24 diary? 25 MR. Van AELSTYN: Yes. Again, that it came from -- 202 1 I'm working from memory here -- that it came from the same 2 source as Ambassador White, that is, it was Colonel Majano. I 3 need to see the declaration of it. 4 THE COURT: And here is something you need to think 5 about. At that time, we don't have Colonel Majano. We don't 6 know for certain, other than what Ambassador White attributes, 7 the operation of the Colonel's mind, because he is not stating 8 that necessarily, which is double hearsay, this is what he was 9 told, but this is his thinking. It was his view that the 10 Colonel's purpose in turning this over was to effectuate some 11 form of cooperation or assistance from the United States with 12 regard to the broader picture. 13 And if there is a different purpose for which it is 14 delivered, then we need to identify that and the source of 15 that knowledge. 16 MR. Van AELSTYN: All right, your Honor. We will 17 address that question further. 18 THE COURT: I think that it still requires 19 foundation. And so you may address it. 20 MR. Van AELSTYN: All right, your Honor. I am not 21 prepared to do so at this time. 22 THE COURT: Understood, and I'm giving you the time 23 to do that. 24 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. 25 THE COURT: All right. Are you ready for the next 203 1 witness? 2 MR. Van AELSTYN: Yes, your Honor, we are, and my 3 colleague, Matthew Eisenbrandt will be examining the next 4 witness. 5 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, does it make sense to 6 take the morning break at this time before we begin with that 7 witness? 8 THE COURT: We can do that. I did want to tell the 9 parties that due to a prior commitment established long before 10 this hearing was set, I have to speak at the noon hour, and so 11 we are going to have to recess at about 11:45 today and we 12 will get back as close to 1:30 as is humanly possible. I have 13 got to go out to north Fresno to speak. But I'm sorry, it was 14 scheduled long in advance, months ago, before this hearing. 15 And so if you want to take the morning recess now, we 16 can. We will stand in recess until 10:45. 17 MR. EISENBRANDT: If I may, our translator apparently 18 is only available through this morning and is not available 19 this afternoon. She also has another commitment this 20 afternoon. 21 THE COURT: All right. Then let's start the 22 testimony now. We will take a shorter break and see if we can 23 get through it. 24 MR. EISENBRANDT: Very well, your Honor. Plaintiff 25 calls Atilio Ramirez Amaya. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 204 1 ATILIO RAMIREZ AMAYA, 2 called as a witness on behalf of the Plaintiff, having been 3 first duly sworn, testified through the Certified Court 4 Interpreter as follows: 5 THE CLERK: Thank you. Please state your name for 6 the record. 7 THE WITNESS: Atilio Ramirez Amaya. 8 THE CLERK: Thank you. 9 THE COURT: You may proceed. 10 DIRECT EXAMINATION 11 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 12 Q. Judge Ramirez, can you please tell us your current 13 occupation? 14 A. Attorney and notary. 15 Q. Can you please give us a very brief background of your 16 education? 17 A. Well, I graduated from the University of Santiago de 18 Compostela in Spain. Also graduated as an attorney from the 19 University of El Salvador. Also graduated from the University 20 of Nicaragua in Managua. And I also have a Master's degree in 21 Penal Code procedures from the Institute of -- in the country 22 of Mexico. 23 Q. Can you please give us a brief description of the jobs you 24 held immediately after the university, graduating from the 25 university. Sorry. Perhaps even a list. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 205 1 A. A justice of the peace in San Salvador. A judge for 2 juveniles in San Salvador. Fourth judge of penal cases or 3 criminal cases. And the magistrate at the superior court in 4 El Salvador in charge of criminal cases. 5 Q. Judge Ramirez Amaya, in terms of what you just mentioned, 6 a criminal judge for the Fourth Court. When did you begin as 7 a judge for the Fourth Court? 8 A. I began as Fourth Judge in criminal court in 1979. 9 Q. And when did you leave that position? 10 A. I left that position on March 27, 1980. 11 Q. Why did you leave that position? 12 A. Because I suffered from an attempt, attempt against my 13 life at my own home. 14 Q. What case were you investigating -- excuse me. 15 What were you working on at the time of that attempt? 16 A. It had been three or four days since the murder or the 17 assassination of Monseñor Arnulfo Romero, and I had been 18 dedicating my work to that case. 19 Q. After the attempt on March 27th, what did you do in 20 response to that attempt? 21 A. I left the country and I was out of the country for almost 22 ten years. 23 Q. I would like to talk about your role as a judge at that 24 time. You said you were investigating a case. In a normal 25 criminal investigation at that time, who were the key people RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 206 1 involved in that investigation? 2 A. At that time, the jurisdiction for a violent murder was 3 for a judge in charge of criminal cases. 4 Q. Were the police involved in investigating? 5 A. Yes. The police in that chain would be the first to be in 6 charge of the investigation. 7 Q. In 1980, were there prosecuting attorneys involved in 8 investigating? 9 A. We call them -- well, prosecutors. But at that time, they 10 did not have the size of role in the investigation. 11 Q. Just to make clear, you stated before that one of the 12 people involved was the criminal judge. Was that judge 13 involved from the very beginning? 14 A. Yes, in some cases, it is. Others, first that's in charge 15 is the justice of the peace, and they do the first part, which 16 is the identification of the body. And then 12 days later, 17 it's sent over to the criminal court judge. 18 Q. In what kind of situation would the criminal court judge 19 investigate during those first 12 days rather than the justice 20 of the peace? 21 A. At that time, a criminal court judge would be involved in 22 high profile cases, such as, for example, the death of a 23 president or a minister or someone of high profile, such as 24 Monseñor Romero. 25 Q. So that is why you were involved in the case instead of a RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 207 1 justice of the peace? 2 A. Yes. Although, I should add that there was another judge 3 also in the beginning investigating and then I came and took 4 over the case. 5 Q. In what city was Monseñor Romero killed? 6 A. In San Salvador. 7 Q. And what police force operated in San Salvador? 8 A. Yes, the only agency in charge of investigating crime was 9 the National Police. 10 Q. Is that a local force, police force, or a national force? 11 A. The National Police works at a national level, and they 12 are right under the Defense Department and the Armed Forces. 13 Q. Can you please describe in a normal criminal 14 investigation, briefly describe what happens, starting from 15 the moment a body is found. 16 THE COURT: This is as of March of 1980. 17 THE WITNESS: At that time, the first people to 18 arrive were the National Police. Then the police would 19 notify, in case of a death, they would notify the forensic 20 clinic of the courts. 21 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 22 Q. When would the criminal judge arrive? 23 A. A criminal judge arrives when he is notified that there is 24 a body. But at that time, he has to wait to be notified, and 25 it's either him that's notified or the justice of the peace. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 208 1 Q. Am I correct that you have been both a justice of the 2 peace and a criminal judge? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. In the case that you have described normally, when a 5 justice of the peace is involved, when would the justice of 6 the peace arrive? 7 A. Not until he's notified by the police. 8 Q. In a normal investigation, who would take fingerprints? 9 A. The police does. 10 Q. Who would take photos of the crime scene? 11 A. The police does. 12 Q. Who would take down names of witnesses? 13 A. The police. 14 Q. Could the police remove evidence from the scene on their 15 own? 16 A. No. They are taken by the judge and the judge gives them 17 to the police. 18 Q. Just to be clear, normally, after the police inform the 19 judge, the judge would arrive at the crime scene? 20 A. Yes. 21 THE COURT: Let me ask. As to the legal system in 22 March of 1980 in San Salvador, what was the legal procedure by 23 which a criminal accusation would be made against a suspect? 24 THE WITNESS: The legal procedure is one of judicial 25 notice, or it was at that time. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 209 1 THE COURT: What official, what public official makes 2 the decision to institute a judicial prosecution against a 3 criminal suspect? 4 THE WITNESS: At that time, the criminal judge. 5 THE COURT: What person or agency then is responsible 6 to prosecute the criminal case against the accused? 7 THE WITNESS: At that time, then the prosecution 8 would come into play. 9 THE COURT: Is there any decision maker, beside the 10 criminal judge, who makes the decision to institute the 11 criminal case against the accused? 12 THE WITNESS: Well, the police are the ones who 13 notify, and it could be the prosecutor who would then 14 prosecute the case, or it could be a citizen who came forth 15 with the accusation. 16 THE COURT: And my specific question is: The 17 decision to institute a formal case, to bring a case to the 18 court to then impose criminal responsibility against the 19 accused, is that decision only the judge's decision, or is 20 there some other agency or judge? 21 THE WITNESS: Well, at that time there was another 22 figure known as a private accuser. 23 THE COURT: Was that private accuser employed by the 24 government? 25 THE WITNESS: He might not be. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 210 1 THE COURT: Did the private accuser have the power to 2 tell the judge, the criminal judge, to commence a criminal 3 case? 4 THE WITNESS: Yes. 5 THE COURT: Let's take the morning recess at this 6 time. We are going to stand in recess until five minutes 7 after 11:00. 8 (Recess) 9 THE CLERK: Court is back in session. 10 THE COURT: Back on the record in Doe versus Saravia. 11 You may proceed. 12 MR. EISENBRANDT: Thank you, your Honor. 13 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 14 Q. Judge Ramirez Amaya, you mentioned earlier a private 15 accusation. In your experience, did anybody bring private 16 accusations in 1980? 17 A. No. Since 1980, up until, perhaps, 1994, there wasn't 18 much of private accusation. 19 Q. And why not? 20 A. For fear of being killed. That would be the accuser 21 fearing. 22 Q. In the case of Archbishop Romero, who initiated that case? 23 A. Basically, I did. Although there was a justice of the 24 peace, I went and took over from the beginning. I took the 25 book where they did the recognition of the body and I started RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 211 1 knowing this case from the beginning. 2 Q. In 1980, in murder cases, were autopsies performed? 3 A. Yes. In all of the cases of violent death. 4 Q. Who would order the autopsy? 5 A. The judge would. 6 Q. Were the National Police involved in autopsies? 7 A. The National Police would secure the surroundings around 8 the court building because the autopsy was performed at the 9 forensic clinic inside the court building. 10 Q. Once there was a list of witnesses established, who would 11 question them? 12 A. The judge. 13 Q. In a murder case, who ran tests of the murder weapon? 14 A. The police. 15 Q. So in a normal investigation, would the National Police 16 and the judge work closely together? 17 A. Yes. Yes, very close. 18 Q. And was it your personal experience as a judge that you 19 worked closely with the National Police on investigations? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Where were you on the evening of March 24th, 1980? 22 A. I was at the National University. 23 Q. And how did you find out about the assassination of 24 Monseñor Romero? 25 A. Well, around 6:30 that evening, agents from the different RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 212 1 security systems, like the National Police and the Guards, 2 they went by and they were shooting into the university. 3 Q. I'm sorry, when you say "security forces," were the 4 National Police part of the security forces? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And why were they shooting? 7 A. They would do this, this shooting would normally be done 8 when there was some sort of student manifestation of some 9 sort, and that's how I found out about Monseñor. 10 Q. How specifically did you find out? 11 A. Okay. After the shooting, when everybody hit the floor 12 and was there for about ten minutes, after about ten minutes, 13 people went onto the streets or with fear, of course, and as I 14 was going to my vehicle, I heard people screaming, "Someone 15 has wounded Monseñor. It appears that someone has killed 16 Monseñor." On the radio. 17 Q. When you say "Monseñor," which Monseñor is that? 18 A. Monseñor Oscar Arnulfo Romero. 19 Q. Where did you go in your vehicle? 20 A. I headed towards the forensic clinic and about that time 21 the administrator of the courts told me that Monseñor was not 22 at the clinic, but he was at the Policlínica, and there was a 23 justice of the peace on his way there. 24 Q. Why did you yourself go? 25 A. I went because I was obligated by the law to go, because RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 213 1 Monseñor was a person who had a high ranking and, as judge of 2 the criminal cases, I have to go. 3 Q. So who was in charge as the judge? Were you in charge or 4 was the justice of the peace in charge? 5 A. I was, because I took it away from -- well, they hadn't 6 begun the autopsy, and so I took over the case and the 7 investigation. 8 Q. When did you arrive at the Policlínica? 9 A. More or less, it would have been around 7:00 p.m. when I 10 arrived at the Policlínica. 11 Q. I should clarify. What is the Policlínica? 12 A. Policlínica is a hospital in El Salvador. 13 Q. Can you please look at Exhibit 42 in the binder in front 14 of you. It should be tabbed. 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. What does this picture show? 17 A. Well, this picture depicts the body of Monseñor Romero, a 18 forensic doctor, Florentin Melendez. He is from the 19 judicial -- 20 Q. Socorro Juridíco is just the name of the establishment? 21 THE INTERPRETER: Yes. 22 THE WITNESS: He was the attorney for the Archbishop. 23 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 24 Q. Is this photo an accurate representation of what you saw 25 at the Policlínica? RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 214 1 A. Yes, this is the first thing that I saw as I entered the 2 room at the Policlínica. 3 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, move to admit Exhibit 4 42 in evidence. 5 THE COURT: Exhibit 42 is received in evidence. 6 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 42 was received.) 7 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 8 Q. Can you please describe the scene at the Policlínica when 9 you arrived. 10 A. When I entered the room, this room was about, smaller than 11 this room, maybe half the size of this room. And surrounding 12 the gurney where Monseñor's body was, there were about almost 13 a hundred people. 14 Q. Were there any police at the Policlínica? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Should they have been there? 17 A. Yes. They should have been there due to security reasons, 18 and that's why, when I arrived, I called my secretary and I 19 asked him to call the police and ask for backup, because there 20 was so much people that we weren't able to work. 21 Q. Was an autopsy performed? 22 A. Yes, but before this, I should say that I had to make 23 everybody leave the room. There were so many people in the 24 room, just people from the town and nuns and relatives and one 25 of his brothers and another sister who was a nun, and just a RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 215 1 lot of people. 2 Q. Okay. Can you briefly describe the autopsy, please. 3 A. Yes. As soon as all this group of people left, then there 4 was only the forensic doctor, the main doctor, who was 5 Mr. Cuellar Ortiz, and another doctor by the name of Pedro 6 Chavarria along with two others. Then x-rays were taken. But 7 at first, they couldn't detect where the bullet was, and so 8 two or three more x-rays had to be taken. Then they found 9 three fragments, bullet fragments, inside the thorax. 10 After that, the doctors, in my presence, then 11 proceeded to cut the cartilage in the sternum area to open the 12 thorax of Monseñor. Once they opened the thorax, the blood 13 was gushing, but it was in clots. It was coagulated. 14 Then they couldn't find the bullet, so the doctors, 15 of course, utilizing gloves, they had to remove all these 16 blood clots from the body. And what they did was they pressed 17 on -- until they dissolved the blood clots one by one, and 18 until there was no blood clot left in the thorax. That's when 19 the three fragments of bullets were found. 20 After this, I once again asked my secretary regarding 21 the police so they could help us secure the evidence in bags, 22 and I was told that the police had not arrived, that there was 23 no police. 24 Q. Can I direct to you Exhibit 113, which should be in one of 25 the large binders. Do you recognize that document? RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 216 1 A. Yes, my signature is on it. 2 Q. Okay. What is that document? 3 A. This is the -- basically, it's the recognition or 4 acknowledgment of the body and autopsy of Monseñor. 5 Q. What did the doctors say was the cause of death? 6 A. A hemorrhage caused by the fragments cutting the aorta. 7 And the -- one of the veins, the vena cava. 8 THE INTERPRETER: I'm not familiar with the term. 9 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 10 Q. Did you sign this document at the time of the autopsy? 11 A. Yes, I signed it in the book, and this document is a 12 transcription taken from that book. 13 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, I would move to 14 introduce Exhibit 113 into evidence. 15 THE COURT: Exhibit 113 will be received in evidence. 16 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 113 was received.) 17 THE COURT: Let me ask, are the signatures of 18 Dr. Chavarria and -- I can't tell, Victor Manuel Pérez Angel, 19 was that a witness or was that another physician? 20 THE WITNESS: Dr. Chavarria signed as the physician. 21 Not all of the physicians signed, but Dr. Chavarria signed for 22 all of them. And Victor Manuel Pérez Angel was my secretary. 23 THE COURT: Thank you. Was your secretary present 24 during the autopsy? 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. As judicial secretary, he was RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 217 1 present. 2 THE COURT: What is the title that appears below your 3 name? 4 THE WITNESS: Fourth Criminal Court Judge. 5 THE COURT: You may proceed. 6 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 7 Q. What time did the autopsy finish? 8 A. The autopsy lasted over three hours, almost four hours. 9 Q. Where did you go next? 10 A. After that, I again spoke to my secretary to call the 11 police so that the police could take us or accompany us, 12 rather, to the scene of the crime that would be the Divine 13 Providence Church, where Monseñor was shot. And after that, 14 since the police didn't come, I, in my own private vehicle, on 15 my own vehicle, I took the secretary, just the secretary and 16 myself. We went to the church. 17 When we exited the vehicle, we also saw Florentin 18 Melendez and Roberto Cuellar, who were attorneys for the 19 Archbishop. 20 Q. And what did you do at the church? 21 A. It is a small church, more or less the size of this room. 22 And we went throughout the church looking for the bullet 23 capsule. We took measurements so we could know from what 24 range or distance the shot could have been fired. We went 25 throughout the church thoroughly trying to find any type of RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 218 1 evidence and we found no evidence. 2 Q. Was -- I'm sorry. 3 A. Well, and then a little before midnight, I took the 4 secretary back to the courts, because the secretary lived 5 far -- well, not real far, but he lived in another town by the 6 name of Soyapango. This is about five kilometers outside San 7 Salvador. And I really did this at his pleading. He asked me 8 to do this because at that time, and especially because of the 9 death, going all the way to Soyapango was basically putting 10 your life in danger of death. 11 You could see in street corners these small tanks 12 that were used by the army and also the police with automatic 13 weapons. And you could see not a single person out on the 14 street, not a single vehicle. 15 Q. Did you have any evidence with you at that time? 16 A. Yes. Since the police was not there, I took the bullet 17 fragments with me and also the x-rays, and I took them to my 18 house. 19 Q. Can I direct you to Exhibit 115. What is that document? 20 A. Yes. This document is a newspaper article or 21 announcement, rather. This was a Mass that the Monseñor was 22 going to give for the restful peace, Sara, S-A-R-A, Meardi de 23 Pinto. 24 Q. Did you see this document in the newspaper? 25 A. Yes, I did see it, but I saw it the following day, after RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 219 1 the death of Monseñor. 2 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, I would move to 3 introduce Exhibit 115 in evidence. 4 THE COURT: For what purpose? 5 MR. EISENBRANDT: For the purpose of notice of the 6 Mass, simply that it appeared in the newspaper, not for the 7 veracity of the contents of the document. 8 THE COURT: Was the newspaper announcement, do you 9 know who originated the printed words that are in the 10 newspaper? Was it the Church that sent it out, if you know? 11 THE WITNESS: Yes, it was Jorge Pinto, the son of 12 Mrs. Pinto. 13 THE COURT: All right. The exhibit which is 115 is 14 received in evidence for the limited purpose of this was 15 announcing the Mass that was to be conducted by Archbishop 16 Romero on the 24th of March. 17 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 115 was received.) 18 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 19 Q. The next day after the assassination, what did you do? 20 A. I arrived at my job at the Fourth Court of Criminal cases, 21 and I began to order. I ordered the files and the book of 22 acknowledgment, so that we could transcribe it. 23 I would also like to add that the court was extremely 24 busy. We had over 3,000 criminal cases, trials pending. And 25 we had to take care of the most urgent things, such as RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 220 1 Monseñor's death and other urgent matters. 2 Q. Did you speak with anyone at the National Police? 3 A. Yes, I told my secretary to call the police so we could 4 get together on how we were going to coordinate the 5 investigation, but the secretary -- and the secretary told me 6 that what the police wanted was for me to send the evidence. 7 Q. And did you send the evidence? 8 A. No, I did not send it. No, I didn't send them, and I 9 spoke to the technician at the police laboratory, who was 10 upset because I was not sending the evidence. He asked me if 11 I didn't trust the police. And I told him that, indeed, I did 12 not trust the police. And I told them that if they wanted to 13 conduct any examination as to what caliber the bullet was, 14 that they had to bring over the microscopes and the scales and 15 whatever else they needed to do their expert analysis. 16 THE COURT: All right. At this time, we are going to 17 be required to take the noon recess. Now, I understand that 18 the interpreter is not available after this time; is that 19 correct? 20 THE INTERPRETER: Your Honor, I could be back for an 21 hour, from 1:30 to 2:30, so I will leave it up to counsel to 22 decide if that is sufficient. 23 MR. EISENBRANDT: With the help of the Court's clerk, 24 we had obtained somebody to help, so -- 25 THE COURT: Right. Our court interpreter is here. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 221 1 THE CLERK: She is raising her hand, though. 2 THE COURT: Could you inform us as to what our 3 logistics are? 4 INTERPRETER VIRGINIA DICONO: Your Honor, I tried 5 calling Anna Watrous to see if she is available at 1:15 to 6 prepare for the witness and continue at 1:30. She has not 7 called me back. I'm going upstairs to my office right now and 8 I can be in touch with counsel. 9 THE COURT: All right, if you would, please. 10 MR. EISENBRANDT: Or if the current interpreter is 11 available for a half an hour, I don't have too many more 12 questions for the witness, I think we could finish within a 13 half an hour. It's whatever would be the most convenient for 14 the Court. 15 INTERPRETER VIRGINIA DICONO: And I don't think it 16 would be a problem to cancel Anna. She is doing something for 17 me at 3:00 o'clock. 18 THE COURT: As I said, I do not have exact predictive 19 ability about when the proceedings are going to end out there. 20 I'm going to be back here as soon as I can. I will make it as 21 close to 1:30 as is humanly possible. It could be a few 22 minutes after that, though. We will stand in recess now. 23 (The lunch recess was taken.) 24 25 RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 222 1 AFTERNOON SESSION 2 1:55 p.m. 3 THE COURT: You may proceed. 4 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 5 Q. Judge Ramirez Amaya, you testified earlier that there was 6 an attempt on your life on March 27th, 1980. Before that 7 time, were you ever threatened? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Can you please explain how you were threatened. 10 A. Yes, on the 24th, that's when Monseñor was killed. 11 Killed. On the 25th, Colonel Majano appeared on television. 12 He is from the Juntade, the Gobierno, government, 13 Revolucionario, revolutionary. 14 MR. EISENBRANDT: We could probably translate the 15 "Revolutionary Governing junta." 16 THE INTERPRETER: Fine. 17 THE WITNESS: Like I said, Colonel Majano appeared at 18 a television conference saying that the assassins of Monseñor 19 Romero would be found immediately by the Interpol, and that as 20 soon as they had the names, which would be immediately, they 21 would then send those names to the Fourth Criminal Judge, 22 which was myself, for their immediate capture. 23 Almost instantly, or moments after this conference, 24 which would have been around 12 noon, I received the first 25 phone call at home, and this was the first threat. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 223 1 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 2 Q. How many phone calls did you receive? 3 A. Well, I received -- or that is, three to four phone calls 4 were received at my home. The ones that I did not answer were 5 answered by my daughter. This would have been on Tuesday and 6 Wednesday, the 25th and the 26th of March. 7 In the phone call received by my daughter, the voice 8 would ask her what her favorite color was, and she was told 9 that that was the color they would paint the coffin that they 10 would have me in. 11 Q. Let's talk about March 27th. Can you please describe what 12 happened that night. 13 A. Yes. At that time, I had a habit of going out in the 14 evenings between 6:00 and 10:00 p.m., and since the death of 15 Monseñor, I hadn't gone out until this date, the 27th, and I 16 will relate to you what happened next. 17 That night, that evening, it was about 10:15 p.m., 18 when someone knocked at the door, asking for me, saying that a 19 friend was looking for me. And they gave the name of this 20 friend. 21 I got up and I told my domestic employee that to be 22 careful, to open the door with caution. And I was carrying a 23 12 caliber shotgun with me. 24 And this was out of fear, because I had been 25 threatened. And in San Salvador, it was a time of incredible RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 224 1 tension, at least all the people that I was somehow involved 2 with or coworkers, they were all in fear. 3 And every day, as soon as the sun went down, I would 4 have this fever, I would get this fever. That night, my 5 employee opened the door and two young men walked in. When 6 the -- when they entered, I had the shotgun in my hands, and I 7 peeked -- I opened the door of my bedroom and I peeked to see 8 if I recognized them and I did not recognize them, so I told 9 them to sit down. They did not see the shotgun that I had, 10 but when I saw them, one that was -- a briefcase that they 11 were carrying, they pulled out of it a -- an automatic weapon. 12 And when I saw the -- their weapon, then at that 13 time, I pulled out the shotgun, and I was about to fire at 14 them, but my domestic employee, she ran towards me, because 15 she saw the automatic gun that they had, so she, instead of 16 throwing herself on the floor, she ran towards me. 17 And at that moment is when the -- one of the men that 18 was inside fired the weapon and he was trying to fire at me, 19 but since my employee had ran towards me, instead of the 20 bullets hitting me, they hit her in the back and in the 21 buttocks area and she fell towards me. She fell to the 22 ground. I wasn't able to break her fall. 23 And at that time, then the men took off. They just 24 broke -- they hit the door hard and they left, and then they 25 just sprayed the house with bullets and then there was a RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 225 1 separate spraying, which later I found out was done to the 2 tires of my vehicle. 3 All this happened within five seconds, perhaps. 4 Then I felt as though they were walking on the roof 5 of the house, and at that time, I started firing the weapon 6 out the windows, because I thought that they would -- they 7 were trying to get into the house. About 15 days earlier, 8 they had killed the Attorney General and also a mayor of the 9 city of San Miguel. And Mario Zamora was the Attorney General 10 of the country, and that's how the men had gotten into his 11 house. 12 And at this time I was just yelling at my wife. I 13 was telling her, "Josefina, they are going to kill us, just 14 like they did with Mario Zamora," and at that time I gave her 15 a pistol and I asked her to start firing out the windows. 16 And we had our daughter, who was between 12 and 14 at 17 the time, and I threw a mattress over her and I was just 18 crawling, crawling through my house, listening for the noises 19 so I could fire in that direction of the noises. 20 Then the footsteps ceased, they stopped, and then 21 there was this death silence until ten minutes later, when the 22 phone rang again. 23 And the voice said to me, "Doctor, this is Eliseo 24 Soto (phonetic) from the National Police." He was an 25 inspector with the National Police. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 226 1 Q. Did he say he was from the National Police? 2 A. I knew that he was an inspector with the National Police. 3 I knew him. 4 Q. How did you know he was an inspector with the National 5 Police? 6 A. Because I knew him from childhood when my mother took him 7 in because he did not have parents, and my mother took him in 8 and helped him and she also helped him get the job at the 9 police. 10 Q. What did Eliseo Soto say? 11 A. He said to me, "Doctor, you are alive," but he was 12 surprised to know that I was alive. 13 And I answered to him, "Yes, I am happy to be alive." 14 And he said, "Don't worry. Perhaps they were just 15 trying to scare you." 16 And then I had spoken to my parents and some friends, 17 and about half an hour later, both my parents and also my 18 friends arrived at the house. 19 I opened the door, and I was greeted by some of my 20 neighbors and also by the night's watchman. 21 And the night watchman, he kind of tried to get into 22 the house, but I stopped him. I showed him the shotgun and I 23 told him, "No, you are not getting inside my house." 24 And he said to me that the police were deaf because 25 the entrance to my neighborhood, I live in a neighborhood RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 227 1 that's enclosed, you can only come in through one street. He 2 said that there were two police vehicles just outside the -- 3 on the street while all this was happening, while they were 4 trying to kill me. Those police officers were just outside on 5 the street. 6 Q. Were those officers in marked cars, marked as police cars? 7 A. Yes, I was told by the night watchman that they were 8 marked patrol units and that they hadn't even moved when they 9 heard all the firing that was going on. 10 There was another one of my neighbors, since she was 11 with her boyfriend, her boyfriend happened to be one of my 12 students at the university. 13 And he asked me for permission to come into my house, 14 and he said to me that what he was about to tell me, he would 15 never repeat and he would never be a witness in any case. And 16 he told me that there were three, during the attempt against 17 my life, there were three persons; two that entered my house, 18 and one that stayed in the driver to the getaway car, and he 19 said the man that was at the wheel in the car was from the 20 National Police. 21 And he said, "You know, Doctor, you know that I work 22 with the police and I know the other police officers." 23 Q. And did you know -- did you personally know that man to 24 work for the police? 25 A. Yes. Then I said to my wife, I said, "We have to leave RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 228 1 the country. Otherwise, we are going to get killed, and it's 2 the police." 3 Q. Did anyone from the police ever arrive to investigate the 4 attempt? 5 A. No, my attempt was never investigated by any judge or any 6 police. 7 Q. So what happened to the employee, whatever happened to 8 her? 9 A. This happened on the 27th, which was a Thursday. So on 10 the 28th, the Friday, I went to work at the court. And in the 11 afternoon, I went to visit her at the hospital. And they had 12 not admitted her into the hospital. She was just on -- 13 somewhere on the floor in the hallway, just as we had left 14 her. 15 And one of the physicians or an intern or, I don't 16 know, but he was one of the doctors there, said that they were 17 going to just do something to her, treat her in some way, but 18 because she was a fat woman, that they weren't going to try to 19 extract the bullets. They were just going to leave them in 20 there. And they were going to release her the following day. 21 I had already had a ticket purchased for Saturday to go to 22 Venezuela, to Caracas, Venezuela to a criminology conference. 23 But I couldn't go to the airport because the police 24 had all the airports and other exits to the city secured, and 25 I was afraid to go to the airport because I figured at RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 229 1 immigration they would -- they could detain me and take me and 2 kill me. 3 So what I decided was to leave the city through the 4 Gulf of Fonseca on a boat, a big boat, with a friend who took 5 me. 6 Q. To what country did you go? 7 A. I we want to Nicaragua because I could not go through 8 Honduras because people from El Salvador could not go into 9 Honduras. So I had to go through the Gulf of Fonseca directly 10 into Nicaragua. 11 Q. And how many years passed until you returned to El 12 Salvador? 13 A. (The witness became emotional.) Almost ten years. Almost 14 ten years. 15 Q. Just a few more questions, Judge Ramirez, and we will be 16 finished. 17 A. I am fine. 18 Q. I just want to return to the moment before that, when you 19 were investigating the assassination of Monseñor Romero. 20 Earlier, we discussed the normal procedures for investigating 21 a case. 22 Would you consider the investigation of Monseñor's 23 murder to be normal? 24 A. No. No. 25 Q. In the case of Monseñor Romero, did the National Police RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 230 1 arrive first at the scene, as they normally would do? 2 A. No, they did not arrive. 3 Q. In the case of Monseñor Romero, did the National Police 4 take fingerprints at the crime scene, like they would normally 5 do? 6 A. No, they did not take fingerprints. 7 Q. In the case of Monseñor, did the National Police take down 8 names of witnesses, as they would normally do? 9 A. No, they did not take names of witnesses. 10 Q. In the case of Monseñor, were the National Police involved 11 in security at the autopsy, as they would normally be? 12 A. No. No. No, they did none of these things. 13 Q. And did the National Police investigate the attempted 14 murder against you, as they would normally do? 15 A. No. They did not, and what happened was that the night of 16 the attempt, this group of police detectives did arrive, and I 17 knew that they were police detectives. And they said that 18 they just wanted to know what was happening. 19 And they said, "Don't you worry. These that came 20 here, they are just amateurs. They are just learning. If we 21 had come in within less than five minutes, we would have done 22 everything." That was the only thing regarding my attempt 23 that was investigated. 24 MR. EISENBRANDT: Thank you, your Honor. I have no 25 further questions of this witness. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 231 1 THE COURT: All right. Let me ask you, do you have 2 any knowledge of the civil law in El Salvador, as of 1980? 3 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 4 THE COURT: In 1980, was there a claim known as 5 "wrongful death" or a case that could be stated for wrongful 6 death under the civil law? 7 THE WITNESS: No. No. No, it was necessary to have 8 a criminal conviction in order to proceed with a civil action. 9 THE COURT: That was a prerequisite, a criminal 10 conviction first, before a civil action could be initiated? 11 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 12 THE COURT: Was the procedure to initiate the civil 13 action in a civil court? Were there civil courts that were 14 not criminal courts at that time in El Salvador? 15 THE WITNESS: Yes, there were. 16 THE COURT: At the time of the attempt on your life, 17 around the 27th of March of 1980, were the civil courts in 18 operation? Were they functioning? 19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 20 THE COURT: When you returned to El Salvador, in 21 approximately 1990, would that be the time? 22 THE WITNESS: Yes, at the end of '89, 1990. 23 THE COURT: Right. At that time, what was the 24 condition of the court system? And by that, I mean both the 25 criminal and the civil courts. Were they functioning? RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 232 1 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 2 THE COURT: And relative to the government, when you 3 returned, had the government of El Salvador changed? 4 THE WITNESS: Yes. The government had changed, but 5 the situation of war, that remained. 6 THE COURT: And how was it that you were able to 7 safely reenter your country? 8 THE WITNESS: The Congress elected me Magistrate to 9 the Supreme Court, and that's how I was able to reenter. 10 THE COURT: And how long did you then continue to 11 serve as Magistrate to the Supreme Court? 12 THE WITNESS: Five years. 13 THE COURT: Was there a time when the condition of 14 war ceased? This is in El Salvador. 15 THE WITNESS: Yes. It ceased in 1992. But the 16 government -- the governing bodies were still the same. 17 THE COURT: At any time that you returned, after 18 1990, was there ever a condition, and I'm going to use the 19 term "martial law", if you recognize it, I will ask you 20 foundationally, first, do you recognize the term in El 21 Salvadoran law of "martial law"? 22 THE WITNESS: Yes. 23 THE COURT: Where civil authority is suspended and 24 the government, either the military or some other paramilitary 25 force exercises the hegemony over the population? RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 233 1 THE WITNESS: Yes. 2 THE COURT: Did that type of martial law ever pertain 3 after 1990? 4 THE WITNESS: Well, there was an Executive power, or 5 someone, an Executive, but it was the military who was 6 governing the country up until 1992. 7 THE COURT: You have said that even though there was 8 a cessation of hostilities, that the military remained in 9 power? 10 THE WITNESS: There was a civil government, but the 11 people that were managing the government and, they were the 12 military up until 1992. The people that were managing and 13 directing the country were the military. 14 THE COURT: Who, under El Salvadoran law, may 15 maintain a cause for wrongful death? What persons? 16 THE WITNESS: At the time of Monseñor Romero's death, 17 it could be done by the State District Attorney or by private 18 parties hiring private counsel. 19 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, if it would help to 20 clarify the issue on your Honor's questions, as we have not 21 qualified Judge Ramirez as an expert, we would be happy to, in 22 addition to the declaration that we submitted from the 23 Salvadoran judge, to provide further information on that 24 issue, since we have not presented Judge Ramirez Amaya as an 25 expert in this area. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 234 1 THE COURT: I'm familiar with that, and I'm only 2 inquiring because the issue is presented, and it appears, if 3 he was appointed Magistrate to the Supreme Court and is a 4 professor of law and also has the experience that he has in 5 understanding the civil system, it seemed to me that he could 6 provide, as a live witness, help to the Court. 7 And so I'm enlisting from his background and 8 experience that which he knows, and I recognize full well that 9 he is not designated as an expert, but you want any judgment 10 to be meaningful and to stand for something, and for that, I 11 think the evidence should be evidence that is as accurate and 12 that is as honest as it can be. 13 MR. EISENBRANDT: Certainly. Merely offering if your 14 Honor would like a further brief on that, we are happy to 15 provide. 16 THE COURT: Thank you. I'm going to ask Judge Amaya, 17 does the El Salvadoran law, from 1980 to the present, for the 18 civil claim for a wrongful death, does it identify the persons 19 who may maintain such an action for the death of another, such 20 as family members? 21 THE WITNESS: They are included as heirs. 22 THE COURT: Can you tell me what persons under the 23 law may maintain an action for wrongful death of another from 24 1980 to the present? 25 THE WITNESS: The mother, the father, the sons or RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 235 1 daughters and siblings, brothers. 2 THE COURT: Siblings, all right. Thank you. And do 3 you have any basis -- if you have no basis to answer the 4 question, I'm going to ask you, I don't want you to answer it. 5 Is it your understanding and experience with El Salvadoran law 6 that without a judgment imposing criminal responsibility on 7 some person for the death of the Archbishop Romero, that no 8 civil action for wrongful death could be maintained in El 9 Salvador from 1980 to the present? 10 THE WITNESS: Yes. 11 THE COURT: So up until today, there is no legal 12 basis on which any person within the class that the law 13 defines as being eligible to maintain an action for wrongful 14 death could bring such a case, because there is no conviction; 15 is that true? 16 (The question was read back.) 17 THE WITNESS: This is true. 18 THE COURT: Again, I don't want you to guess or 19 speculate about this. But do you have any information or 20 understanding why no case, no criminal case, has been brought 21 in El Salvador from 1980 to present to fix the criminal 22 responsibility for the death of Archbishop Romero? 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, and these are political reasons. 24 The founder of the ARENA party, Roberto D'Aubuisson, he 25 founded this ARENA Party, and he was aided by a lot of people RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 236 1 that have paraded through here, Negro Sagrera and some other 2 people mentioned by Ambassador White, those persons were the 3 founders of the ARENA Party, along with D'Aubuisson. And 4 since 1988, up and to the present time, this ARENA party and 5 that group has been in power. So, therefore, whomever would 6 like to initiate the case of Monseñor Romero through the 7 District Attorney's office, the District Attorney's office, 8 won't touch it. 9 And if any private attorney would like to initiate it 10 as a private action, they would have to accuse all those 11 people that are in power. And, of course, this will not be 12 done by attorneys. 13 THE COURT: Do I infer from your answer that there is 14 fear of reprisal by any attorney who would maintain a private 15 action to try to assign criminal responsibility for the 16 assassination of Archbishop Romero? 17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 18 THE COURT: Would the reprisal, to your knowledge and 19 understanding, be from the government or would it be 20 paramilitary or some other extrajudicial force? 21 THE WITNESS: It would come from the ARENA Party, who 22 is in command of the government. 23 THE COURT: Is your present place of practice of law 24 in San Salvador, in the country of El Salvador? 25 THE WITNESS: I am a Professor of Criminal Law, and I RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 237 1 am -- also I'm an attorney for the indigent and for those lost 2 causes. 3 THE COURT: Since 1988 to the present, what 4 authority, if there is one, controls the District Attorney in 5 whatever jurisdiction the District Attorney operates, who 6 would be able to bring the criminal case for the assassination 7 of Archbishop Romero? 8 THE WITNESS: You are asking who is in charge of -- 9 THE COURT: Who has the authority over the District 10 Attorney, over the public prosecutor? 11 THE WITNESS: Apparently, or in appearance, nobody 12 does. But we all know that it is the President of the 13 Republic. 14 THE COURT: To understand the basis for your answer, 15 the American law seeks what is called a "foundation" for your 16 answer. Are the public prosecutors appointed by the ruling 17 party? 18 THE WITNESS: At that time, yes, when the case of 19 Monseñor Romero. Now it is done by Congress. 20 THE COURT: Based on your knowledge, since 1988, and 21 your experience as a professor of law and as a lawyer and a 22 judge, a Magistrate Judge for the Supreme Court, is the 23 Congress independent in the sense that it can appoint a 24 prosecutor who will answer only to the cause of justice, not 25 to a partisan interest? The word we use is "independent." RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 238 1 THE WITNESS: In theory, this could happen, this 2 could be done, but in practice, it is not. 3 THE COURT: All right. And my last question. Is 4 there any fact or group of facts that you could point to that 5 would show the lack of independence in fact, not theory, in 6 reality, of the public prosecutor who would bring the case? 7 THE WITNESS: The law does not provide for the 8 appointment of a prosecutor in this matter. 9 THE COURT: All right. And my question was slightly 10 different, and I will ask it again. Are there any examples or 11 anything that would be authoritative we could look to to prove 12 the lack of independence of the public prosecutor? 13 THE WITNESS: Yes. And this is something that's very 14 negative, because never has a District Attorney prosecuted any 15 member of the ARENA Party, any secretary of any department, 16 anybody that is in power. 17 THE COURT: Does that complete his answer? 18 THE WITNESS: And no Secretary of State. 19 THE COURT: All right. 20 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, may I ask one follow up 21 question? 22 THE COURT: Yes, of course. 23 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 24 Q. Judge Ramirez Amaya, is there any law in El Salvador that 25 provides amnesty against criminal prosecutions -- RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 239 1 THE INTERPRETER: Provides amnesty for? 2 BY MR. EISENBRANDT: 3 Q. -- for criminal prosecutions of human rights abuses? 4 I can rephrase the question to simplify it. Is there 5 any amnesty law in power now in El Salvador? 6 A. Yes. There was a law, an amnesty law since 1992 for those 7 persons that commit the crimes during war time. 8 Q. And is it your understanding that this law covers the 9 assassination of Archbishop Romero? 10 A. No, I don't believe they are covered by it. 11 Q. Does this law block criminal prosecutions, prevent 12 criminal prosecutions? 13 A. Yes, but this law was mainly enacted to avoid military 14 people being prosecuted. But there are some cases that are 15 against humanity and some other grave cases, such as the one 16 of Monseñor, that are not covered by this amnesty law. 17 THE COURT: Do you have knowledge whether or not 18 suspects believed to be responsible for the assassination of 19 Archbishop Romero have been granted amnesty? 20 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes. 21 THE COURT: And to your understanding, the 22 perpetrators have been given amnesty by the El Salvadoran 23 government? 24 THE WITNESS: Not directly for that case, but they 25 have not been prosecuted. They have not been brought to RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 240 1 justice. And they have committed other crimes and on those 2 other crimes, they have been given amnesty. 3 THE COURT: Thank you very much. That's all I have. 4 MR. EISENBRANDT: I'm finished as well. Thank you, 5 your Honor. 6 THE COURT: Mr. van Aelstyn? 7 MR. Van AELSTYN: Yes, your Honor. There has been 8 some question raised as to the accuracy of some of the 9 interpretation. 10 THE COURT: Understood. 11 MR. Van AELSTYN: And I wonder if -- I'm sorry, the 12 court interpreter here -- 13 THE COURT: Yes, she is here. 14 MR. Van AELSTYN: Could you provide some assistance? 15 INTERPRETER VIRGINIA DICONO: I'm wondering if 16 perhaps interpreter fatigue is sitting in. 17 THE COURT: Normally we switch interpreters about 18 every 20 minutes, and so our interpreter has been going a long 19 time here. 20 INTERPRETER VIRGINIA DICONO: I will be happy to 21 assist, besides I believe she had to leave at 2:30. 22 MR. Van AELSTYN: I guess we are done. 23 THE COURT: Well, we have the interpreter. We are 24 happy to resolve any uncertainty. We should have as accurate 25 a record as possible. RAMIREZ AMAYA - D 241 1 MR. Van AELSTYN: I appreciate that. Could you give 2 us just one moment to speak and we will want some followup 3 questions. 4 (Pause in the proceedings.) 5 MR. Van AELSTYN: Perhaps this would be a good time 6 for the afternoon break. 7 THE COURT: Do you want to take until 3:30? 8 MR. Van AELSTYN: Sure. Or 3:25. 9 THE COURT: We will be going to probably 4:45 at 10 least. 11 MR. Van AELSTYN: Let's say 3:30 and we will go to 12 4:45. 13 INTERPRETER VIRGINIA DICONO: Your Honor, I have to 14 leave at 4:00 o'clock. 15 MR. Van AELSTYN: We won't go beyond 4:00 with this 16 witness. 17 INTERPRETER VIRGINIA DICONO: Thank you. 18 (Recess) 19 THE COURT: Back on the record in Doe versus Saravia. 20 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor, for giving 21 us time to deal with the interpretation issue. We have 22 decided not to call Judge Ramirez Amaya back to the stand. 23 We are ready to proceed to our next witness. 24 THE COURT: You may. 25 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. Plaintiff KARL - D 242 1 calls Professor Terry Lynn Karl. 2 TERRY LYNN KARL, 3 called as a witness on behalf of the Plaintiff, having been 4 first duly sworn, testified as follows: 5 THE CLERK: Please state your name for the record. 6 THE WITNESS: Terry Lynn Karl, Terry with a Y and 7 Karl with a K. 8 THE COURT: Two Rs or one? 9 THE WITNESS: One. 10 THE COURT: You may proceed. 11 MR. Van AELSTYN: Thank you, your Honor. We will be 12 seeking to qualify Professor Karl as an expert. Towards that 13 end, we have a copy of her CV, which we would like to offer as 14 our next exhibit in order, which I believe is number 221. 15 THE COURT: We will mark 221 for identification. 16 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 221 was marked for 17 identification.) 18 MR. Van AELSTYN: I do have additional copies, if 19 necessary. 20 THE COURT: Thank you. 21 DIRECT EXAMINATION 22 BY MR. Van AELSTYN: 23 Q. Professor Karl, I have given you a copy of your CV, which 24 has been marked for identification purposes as Exhibit 221. I 25 will ask you several questions relating to your CV. KARL - D 243 1 What is your current employment position? 2 A. I am the Gildred Professor of Latin American Studies, 3 Professor of Political Science and a Senior Fellow at the 4 Institute of International Studies at Stanford University. 5 Those are my formal titles. 6 Q. Professor Karl, what I would like to do, your CV is 7 multiple pages here, 25, I believe. We are not going to run 8 through the entirety of it. 9 If I -- I would like to just cover the most pertinent 10 points. 11 If you could, please, first tell us about your 12 academic credentials, the degrees that you hold. 13 A. Yes. I hold a B.A., an M.A., a Ph.D. with Distinction 14 from Stanford University. 15 Q. In what field is the Ph.D.? 16 A. It's in Political Science with an expertise in Latin 17 America. 18 Q. Let's run through now the academic positions that you have 19 held. And why don't we work back in time from your current 20 position as the Gildred Professor of Latin American Studies. 21 Before we do that, could you please tell me what is 22 the Gildred Professor of Latin American Studies? 23 A. The Gildred Professorship is an endowed professorship at 24 Stanford. It is Stanford's highest academic honor for 25 expertise in Latin America. KARL - D 244 1 Q. If you could proceed back through the previous academic 2 positions that you have held. Why don't we go back to your 3 first position as a Full Associate Professor after you 4 received your Ph.D. 5 THE COURT: Excuse me, if you could, before that. 6 Would you define, for our record, Latin America? 7 THE WITNESS: Latin America, in our -- my area of 8 expertise, and the way it is used, incorporates Central 9 America, South America and the Caribbean. 10 THE COURT: Thank you. 11 THE WITNESS: And it is primarily the 12 Spanish-speaking countries. 13 THE COURT: All right. Sorry for the interruption. 14 MR. Van AELSTYN: No problem. Thank you. 15 THE WITNESS: Excuse me, Spanish and Portuguese 16 speaking countries. 17 MR. Van AELSTYN: We won't mention French Guiana. 18 THE WITNESS: I was a little more worried about 19 Brazil. 20 BY MR. Van AELSTYN: 21 Q. Prior to the Gildred Professorship, the next position is 22 the William R. and Gretchen Kimball University Fellow in 23 undergraduate position. Why don't you run through this. You 24 have a better understanding than we do. 25 A. That's an endowed fellowship that was given to the ten KARL - D 245 1 best teachers at Stanford, or what the University deemed to be 2 the ten best teachers at Stanford. 3 Q. All right. Are there different levels of professorship, 4 associate, full, or anything like that? 5 A. Yes, at every university there is assistant professor, 6 which was what I was at Harvard University. 7 Q. When was that? 8 A. It's on the vita. It was 1981 to 1985. 9 Q. Why don't we move forward from there? 10 A. Yeah. I then moved to Stanford University and I was 11 promoted to the Associate Professor of that -- the difference 12 is that that means that you have tenure and are a permanent 13 position in the University. 14 Once you get to the tenured level, you -- there are 15 different levels after that. Full professor is the highest 16 level in a number of universities. There are other research 17 universities that have endowed chairs, and that is the highest 18 possible place you can get. That's what the Gildred Professor 19 is. So an endowed chair and a tenured full professor at 20 Stanford. 21 Q. You began as an assistant professor at Harvard, you moved 22 to Stanford, and became as an -- 23 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry. That went by me way too 24 fast. I apologize. 25 BY MR. Van AELSTYN: KARL - D 246 1 Q. You began as an Assistant Professor at Harvard University, 2 and then became an Associate Professor at Stanford University, 3 and then were elevated to a Full Professor at Stanford 4 University, and finally, you were elevated to the Gildred 5 Professor of Latin American Studies, an endowed chair at 6 Stanford University? 7 A. That's right. There is a position I have also held at 8 Stanford, which is that I was the Director of Latin American 9 Studies at Stanford for 12 years. 10 Q. In all of these positions that you have held in academia, 11 has there been a concentration on Latin American Studies? 12 A. Absolutely. It's my main area of expertise. 13 Q. In addition to your positions, you have conducted -- let 14 me turn to page 2, and under the heading of Research 15 Experience, you mention a number of dates and areas of the 16 world. 17 Is this field research that you have conducted? 18 A. This is field research I have conducted, that's right. 19 Q. Because of its relevance to this case, I will overlook -- 20 we won't go into your field experience in other areas. 21 Could you please summarize for us the field research 22 that you have conducted in El Salvador, in particular, but you 23 have it here in Central America, listing 1981 through 2001? 24 A. 1981 through 2001 -- every one of those trips includes El 25 Salvador, by the way, but I just put Central America, because KARL - D 247 1 sometimes I would go to Guatemala or Costa Rica or somewhere 2 else, but every one of those trips was a research trip in El 3 Salvador, which was my country of interest in Central America. 4 It's always been my primary country and interest. It's the 5 country I have written on the most, and those are my research 6 trips. 7 I have other trips to Central America -- excuse me, 8 to El Salvador that are not listed on this vita, because they 9 were not necessarily in my capacity as an academic, but as a 10 pro bono human rights investigator or something like that. 11 Q. Well, let's leave out those for the moment. 12 Could you please summarize the kinds of research that 13 you conducted during these research trips in El Salvador, 14 beginning in 1981, and just summarize. There is quite a few, 15 obviously. 16 A. All of these trips are -- include research that I do for 17 material that I write. So all of this includes field 18 research, looking for documentation, lots and lots of 19 interviewing. Gathering materials, reading through archives, 20 gathering -- I may be the only person who has ever read the 21 archives of some of the Salvadoran newspapers, for example. 22 The -- so all of those are things that I do for my 23 own research. 24 In addition, I have worked for a number of -- for the 25 U.S. government and for a number -- and for the United KARL - D 248 1 Nations, in particular -- 2 Q. Professor Karl, I'm sorry to interrupt you. Those appear 3 in your CV, and I do intend to ask you about those. 4 I would like to focus upon the kinds of research you 5 do, just the academic research that you do for the moment. 6 A. Sure, sure. 7 Q. So you read archives of periodicals in El Salvador. Do 8 you interview people? 9 A. Most of my work in El Salvador is constant interviewing, 10 because almost everything else I can photocopy and take with 11 me. 12 So the time I spend in El Salvador is talking to 13 people, and it's the most important work. It's actually the 14 work I value the most of the work I have done the most. I 15 interview everybody in El Salvador that will talk to me and I 16 follow around people who won't talk to me until they agree to. 17 I have interviewed extensively all political parties. 18 I have interviewed extensively within the military and the 19 police. I have interviewed extensively inside the governing 20 party now, the ARENA Party. 21 I have traveled with various presidential candidates 22 on their presidential campaigns. That includes former 23 President Duarte and it includes Roberto D'Aubuisson, who 24 figures prominently in this case. 25 Q. You have interviewed Roberto D'Aubuisson? KARL - D 249 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. On more than one occasion? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. We also heard the name earlier today of Colonel Majano. 5 Is that somebody you have interviewed? 6 A. Absolutely. 7 Q. Go on. 8 THE COURT: I take it that you speak Spanish? 9 THE WITNESS: I speak Spanish, yes. 10 I interviewed all sides of -- this is a very 11 conflictual country, which is probably very clear right now. 12 I have interviewed all sides, including all factions 13 of the Left, various factions of the Christian Democratic 14 Party and other political parties. Various factions in the 15 Right, the military, and I think I have interviewed people in 16 every branch of the military and the police. 17 I have done extensive investigations of patterns and 18 practices of repression. I have done extensive investigations 19 of death squads and how they function. I have interviewed 20 people who are in death squads and have talked to me about the 21 actions that they have carried out. 22 I have interviewed, when there was a civil war going 23 on, I interviewed also inside the guerilla zones. 24 I think I have talked to a lot of people in El 25 Salvador. KARL - D 250 1 BY MR. Van AELSTYN: 2 Q. Professor Karl, I think there is one question on probably 3 everybody's mind, which is -- and this is a little off the 4 topic, but how have you done this? It sounds like a very 5 conflicted area. 6 A. Very, very carefully. I do not research in El Salvador 7 any more. It is an extremely -- it was, and in some cases 8 continues to be, an extremely dangerous place to do research. 9 It was an extremely difficult place to find out 10 information for anyone. From Bob -- Ambassador White. Every 11 single ambassador, every single researcher. 12 It is the country, in the years that we are looking 13 at, where more journalists died than in the entire war in Viet 14 Nam. More foreign journalists died in El Salvador in the '80 15 to '83 period, than journalists who died in the entire war in 16 Viet Nam. 17 It is a place where information is extremely 18 difficult to gather and, therefore, there is a very high 19 premium on that information. 20 Q. If I could draw your attention to page 16 of your CV, 21 there are listed there some positions. Let me start with one 22 near the bottom. The Latin American Policy Group for U.S. 23 Representative Michael Barnes, Chairman of the House Committee 24 on Inter-American Affairs, 1983 to 1985. 25 Could you please tell us about that. KARL - D 251 1 A. Excuse me, could I add one thing to my last answer? 2 Q. Sure. 3 A. When things are dangerous in El Salvador, you almost 4 always get a warning of some sort. And there are gaps in my 5 travels to El Salvador, and that is because it was my personal 6 judgment, based on my room being searched or being followed, 7 or something that made me think it was too dangerous, to leave 8 the country and get out. 9 And so as a foreigner, you have a great deal more 10 protection in that country than a Salvadoran would. But it is 11 extremely dangerous. And I think that all of us, the very few 12 of us who actually carried out extensive research there, knew 13 that we had to go in and out and leave relatively quickly. It 14 was not a safe place. 15 Q. I'm sorry, I may have misunderstood you. Warning signs, 16 such as your room being searched and stuff, was that here in 17 the United States or in El Salvador? 18 A. El Salvador. 19 Q. Can you give us an example of the time in which you acted 20 on something which you interpreted as a warning? 21 A. Yes. I came back to my room one day in a hotel, this was 22 in 1983, during a state of siege, and it was very clear that 23 somebody had been in my room. And I packed up and left the 24 country. 25 Q. That's pretty clear. So if I could draw your attention KARL - D 252 1 then to page 16 and ask you to discuss a couple of these 2 items. I mentioned, first, the house subcommittee on 3 Inter-American affairs, 1983 to 1985. What was that? 4 A. Michael Barnes was the Head of the House Subcommittee. 5 This was the Committee that was most involved in U.S. policy 6 towards Central America. 7 And at this time, U.S. policy in Central America was 8 an extremely controversial issue. I worked with him. I was 9 at Harvard at the time, and we do a lot more work with 10 Congress when you are on the East Coast, and I investigated a 11 number of things for that Committee. 12 One of the things, for example, I and others 13 investigated, was the use of U.S. aid. There was a great deal 14 of money pouring into El Salvador from the United States, and 15 there was trouble accounting for what was happening to that 16 money. And -- 17 Q. What do you mean, trouble accounting for it? 18 A. Well, for example, there were not very good accounts. 19 There was over a million dollars a day entering El Salvador. 20 It is a very small country that had no history of being used 21 to those kind of revenues. And when it came to the Congress 22 asking for accounts of where that money was going, it was 23 clear that no one seemed to know where very significant 24 amounts of money were going. 25 I became part of an investigation that documented KARL - D 253 1 what were called "ghost brigades." Ghost brigades were 2 brigades that were made up by military officers. They would 3 make up a brigade of a whole group of people, say a hundred 4 soldiers, that simply didn't exist. They would collect 5 salaries for that brigade, and it would enter a salary, but in 6 fact there was no brigade. 7 Another time I investigated U.S. food aid. We gave a 8 great deal of food aid in El Salvador that was to be 9 distributed among poor, and it was marked specifically "not 10 for sale." So I documented its sale in markets throughout El 11 Salvador by members of the military or their families. 12 MR. Van AELSTYN: Your Honor, as a footnote, Michael 13 Barnes has submitted a declaration in this matter. 14 THE COURT: Thank you. 15 BY MR. Van AELSTYN: 16 Q. Moving up two entries, we have an entry, "Report and 17 Recommendation on Congressional Delegation to El Salvador," 18 sponsored by Congressman Edward Roybal, in January of 1987. 19 What was that? 20 A. I led a number of -- I led or participated in, I should 21 say. I shouldn't say "led," they were always led formally by 22 a Congressman, but I went along as the knowledgeable person 23 about El Salvador. 24 And there are so many of them. 25 This was, again, the issue of Central America being KARL - D 254 1 extremely controversial, there were elections that were 2 scheduled for 1988. This was a very difficult time in El 3 Salvador, and it was a time in which the U.S. was pressuring 4 very hard to permit opposition candidates to return who had 5 been in the opposition to the government, to return and to be 6 able to campaign for the 1989 elections. 7 Q. Leaders of opposition that had fled El Salvador? 8 A. That had fled El Salvador. They were returning. 9 And in this particular period, if I recall correctly, 10 between '87 and '88, there was a great effort to see whether 11 opposition leaders could return and actually campaign. They 12 could certainly -- at least some of them could go back to El 13 Salvador without being afraid of being killed if they were 14 high enough level and high enough profile. So they were left 15 alone. 16 The question was would they actually be able to 17 campaign in the election. 18 So there were a lot of questions about whether the 19 elections that were being held in El Salvador in this period 20 had any real guarantees for opposition candidates to be able 21 to participate. 22 And I was investigating a number of those things and 23 there were a number of Congressional delegations. I don't 24 believe they are all listed on my CV. 25 Q. You mentioned work as an investigator for Congressional KARL - D 255 1 delegations. Have you served as an adviser for -- in any 2 other capacity to any other branches of the United States 3 Government concerning El Salvador? 4 A. Well, I would say as an adviser, but not as a -- with a 5 formal title of "adviser." In other words, governments, U.S. 6 government, different branches of the U.S. government contact 7 me with a great deal of regularity to give opinions or write 8 something for them based on some issue. 9 So, for example, I am particularly interested in 10 issues of military -- of the organization of the military, as 11 was the U.S. military at the time. 12 So I did some extensive work with certain military 13 academic studies. This is important, because these are 14 academic studies carried out by the military war college, 15 carried out by Westpoint academics, or else carried out by 16 somebody who was appointed to look at the Salvador situation. 17 There was a great deal of worry about the nature of 18 the Salvadoran army and armed forces, so there was a number of 19 military studies of the army at this time, and I helped out in 20 some of those, provided information and wrote memos, et 21 cetera. 22 I also, I think probably the two most important ones, 23 one was by General Frederick Woerner, who was the head of the 24 U.S. Southern Command at the time. And there is something 25 called the "Woerner Report." KARL - D 256 1 What they would do is they would send out lots of 2 feelers to people who were working on this area, and they 3 would say, "Give us your opinion of what's going on here, or 4 read this draft for us and tell us if you think it's right or 5 it's not right." 6 So there is a -- an academic give and take in these 7 things. 8 Q. So you did provide some comments on the Woerner Report 9 that you referenced before that was completed? 10 A. No, not before it was completed, no. But I talked to 11 General Woerner about it a number of times. 12 Q. That was my next question. You have interacted with 13 military academics, yo