U N R E D A C T E D 1259 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION ------------------------------------------------------- ANA PATRICIA CHAVEZ, CECILIA ) SANTOS, JOSE FRANCISCO ) CALDERON, ERLINDA FRANCO, AND ) DANIEL ALVARADO ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) VS. ) NO. 03-2932-Ml/P ) ) ) NICOLAS CARRANZA, ) ) Defendant. ) ------------------------------------------------------- TRIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JON PHIPPS MCCALLA, JUDGE NOVEMBER 9, 2005 VOLUME VIII BRENDA PARKER OFFICIAL REPORTER SUITE 942 FEDERAL BUILDING 167 NORTH MAIN STREET MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE 38103 1260 A P P E A R A N C E S Appearing on behalf of the Plaintiffs: BASS BERRY & SIMS PLC 315 DEADERICK STREET, SUITE 2700 NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37238-3001 By: DAVID R. ESQUIVEL, ESQ. CAROLYN PATTY BLUM, ESQ. CENTER FOR JUSTICE & ACCOUNTABILITY 291 WEST 12TH STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10014 MATTHEW J. EISENBRANDT, ESQ. CENTER FOR JUSTICE & ACCOUNTABILITY 870 MARKET STREET, SUITE 684 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 Appearing on behalf of the Defendant: FARGARSON & BROOKE 65 UNION AVENUE 9TH FLOOR MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE 38103 By: ROBERT M. FARGARSON, ESQ. BRUCE BROOKE, ESQ. 1261 W I T N E S S I N D E X WITNESS PAGE LINE JOSE ARAUJO DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BROOKE: ........................ 1264 8 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION BY MR. ESQUIVEL: ............................ 1282 19 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BROOKE: ........................ 1299 20 CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ESQUIVEL: ...................... 1310 2 REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BROOKE: ....................... 1330 20 JULIO ROMERO DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BROOKE: ........................ 1335 8 CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. EISENBRANDT: ................... 1343 4 REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BROOKE: ........................ 1361 2 NICOLAS CARRANZA DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FARGARSON ....................... 1364 6 1262 E X H I B I T I N D E X EXHIBIT NUMBER PAGE LINE Exhibit Number B CV of Jose Araujo 1290 20 Exhibit Number C Report 1290 22 1263 1 WEDNESDAY MORNING AND AFTERNOON 2 NOVEMBER 9, 2005 3 The jury trial in this case resumed on this 4 date, Wednesday, November 9, 2005, at 9:35 o'clock a.m., 5 when and where evidence was introduced and proceedings 6 were had as follows: 7 8 ____________ 9 10 THE COURT: Is everybody ready? Okay. We can 11 bring the panel in. 12 (Jury in at 9:35 a.m.) 13 THE COURT: All right. You may be seated, and 14 counsel may proceed. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1264 1 (Miguel Angel Urrutia previously sworn to 2 interpret Spanish into English and English into Spanish.) 3 JOSE ARAUJO, 4 was thereupon called as a witness on behalf of the 5 Defendant, and having been first duly sworn, was 6 examined and testified as follows: 7 DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) 8 BY MR. BROOKE: 9 Q. Good morning, sir. 10 A. Good morning. 11 Q. Who was the last military dictator of El Salvador? 12 A. Gerald Carlos Humberto Romero. 13 Q. And -- after -- how did Romero lose power or authority? 14 A. Well, there existed a group of young officers, young 15 military officers who wished to change the context of the 16 national policy of the Republic of El Salvador with the 17 purpose of establishing defined democratic institutions that 18 would respond to good social economic policies, and as well as 19 to the physical human improvement of the country. Because 20 these were demands that El Salvador had received through the 21 country as a country incorporated to the community of the 22 united nations, and it was their purpose that El Salvador 23 would be a country that would undergo changes, and this 24 allowed that El Salvador will find itself in higher positions 25 of treaties and conventions as acquired. Nevertheless, DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1265 1 General Carlos Humberto Romero, he wished to continue in his 2 position governing the country of El Salvador, and this 3 revolutionary government junta, which is a not a civilian 4 junta, but is a revolutionary junta in 1979 that took power, 5 this allowed that these young military officers and other 6 civilians to become incorporated into the government of the 7 country. This, therefore, allows, in turn, for the event that 8 General Romero, that on the 15th of October at 10 o'clock -- 9 10:30 in the morning, General Romero was being advised that he 10 should leave the position of president of the republic because 11 the events that had taken place prior to that time had not 12 been, shall we say, favorable. Now, the conditions I'm 13 speaking of are the living conditions of the society of El 14 Salvador. I'm referring mostly to the life conditions, the 15 economic progress of El Salvador, because people have their 16 wish or their desire to move forward in their professions and 17 their jobs, in their way of living, along with each one of 18 their family members. So this allowed these group of young 19 military officers who were incorporated into this -- this new 20 thought process, this new ideology that allowed them to 21 incorporate a government junta, which was a government junta 22 that was incorporated in 1979 comprised of two military 23 officers and three civilians who steered the country towards 24 the state in which he should be steered to comply with the 25 needs, the needs that were the demands of El Salvador. So DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1266 1 these needs were very important. This was a government that 2 was installed initially, and as it was, it didn't have good 3 agreement internally, it didn't have a good -- they didn't get 4 along very well concerning the management and the steering at 5 the time; and at the end, it was necessary for the three 6 civilians to resign from the first government junta, so the 7 three other civilians could be defined and move on through the 8 phase of this change. This allowed the three civilians to be 9 incorporated because they had a different vision of how to 10 steer the country in the way that it could be conducted for 11 the improvement of the life conditions. 12 Q. Prior to October 15th, 1979, can you tell the jury the 13 historical ten-year background of the civil war in El 14 Salvador? 15 MR. ESQUIVEL: Objection, beyond the witness' 16 area of expertise, Your Honor. 17 THE COURT: It appears to be correct. 18 Objection sustained. 19 MR. BROOKE: May we approach, Your Honor? 20 THE COURT: You may. 21 (The following proceedings had at side-bar 22 bench.) 23 MR. BROOKE: Your Honor, this witness has 24 prepared previously a report. 25 THE COURT: I just need to see it. Okay, he's DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1267 1 47, is that correct, 47 years old? 2 MR. BROOKE: Yeah, he was 18 in 1980. 3 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor I believe -- 4 THE COURT: I think you're right, he is 43. 5 MR. BROOKE: And he is, we submit, both a fact 6 witness, because he lived through it as well as he has 7 taught the historical background at these various courses 8 and schools that he has been part of, and this report has 9 been submitted for months, there has never been any motion 10 in limine or anything ever filed. 11 THE COURT: Right. 12 MR. ESQUIVEL: Well, Your Honor, he's not 13 qualified as an expert in history. He's a graduate of 14 something called a military university of El Salvador. 15 THE COURT: Right. 16 MR. ESQUIVEL: And apparently taught one year 17 as a professor there, and then became an administrator. 18 THE COURT: Right. 19 MR. ESQUIVEL: And in his deposition, he 20 purported to be an expert on a number of different areas, 21 and in attempting to clarify that during the course of the 22 deposition, counsel for Colonel Carranza said that we are 23 offering him as an expert in this area of the case and 24 this area of the organic law and the duties, and he may be 25 familiar with other things, but we're using him as an DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1268 1 expert in those laws and those rules in that area 2 basically. 3 THE COURT: I understood that is what he was 4 going to be doing. 5 MR. ESQUIVEL: And this testimony about the 6 historical background of things that took place when he 7 was between 7 and 17 years old is not proper for his 8 testimony. He's not an expert in those areas. 9 THE COURT: He has not demonstrated it by any 10 discussion of either study or experience. 11 MR. BROOKE: Well, Your Honor, I submit that it 12 is the same issue that Your Honor recognized with 13 Professor Karl in that -- 14 THE COURT: She is an expert. 15 MR. BROOKE: -- as to military observations 16 that her testimony would go to the weight, whatever the 17 jury wanted to give to that, and this man lived through 18 this, he -- 19 THE COURT: I don't know that he lived through 20 it. He doesn't say that he lived through it. He was a -- 21 the fact that you're a certain age and lived at a certain 22 place doesn't mean that you're aware of what is going on. 23 MR. BROOKE: He delivered newspapers for six 24 years, I think he admitted. 25 THE COURT: Right, well, he did. But I mean DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1269 1 I'm not sure being a newspaper courier completely 2 qualifies you. I don't think the newspaper carrier for 3 the Wall Street Journal reads it. 4 MR. BROOKE: Is that a point of judicial 5 notice? 6 THE COURT: No, I'm just saying that that 7 really wouldn't be a successful argument. If he studied 8 it, if he studied it -- 9 MR. BROOKE: I'll go into that and see if I get 10 the correct answers. I submit that it goes purely to the 11 weight. He has been a student at the university, he has 12 gone through over seven years of post-high school study. 13 He has taught military students as well as regular 14 students. 15 THE COURT: I'm just looking at the conclusion 16 in the report which -- that Colonel Carranza served 17 locally to the armed forces complying with the duties 18 written in Article 26 of the organic law of the armed 19 forces. He was a good soldier, good citizen and 20 specifically grantor of the guaranties and human rights in 21 El Salvador. 22 MR. BROOKE: Right now the only thing I have 23 got into is attempting to get the background of the 24 revolution for the ten years prior to Romero being sent 25 out. DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1270 1 THE COURT: That's an area where I haven't had 2 any indication that he's got the ability to provide 3 information. Being a preteen or teenager during that 4 period of time just wouldn't qualify. Now, he could tell 5 me that he has conducted a study, although I don't think 6 he says that in his materials, but if he had -- 7 MR. BROOKE: I'll go into what he has reviewed 8 to prepare for the case. Because we have got here 9 Professor Karl, everything she did was studied after 1981 10 or whatever. This man has been through it all. 11 THE COURT: Right, but she has read every -- 12 whether we accept her or not, she was able to testify that 13 she has read about every book about El Salvador through 14 2001, and she was pretty persuasive that she probably did. 15 So she has an extraordinary -- well, what is the harm in 16 letting him do this? I mean he's -- 17 MR. ESQUIVEL: The harm is that he's offering 18 opinions about things that he's not an expert in, and as a 19 fact witness, if he observed certain things personally, if 20 he has personal knowledge, he's entitled to do that, but 21 the prejudice to the plaintiffs is to allow someone to 22 take the witness stand and give his own views of 23 Salvadoran history and politics when he's not qualified to 24 offer any opinions on that subject. 25 MR. BROOKE: I ask to be allowed to go ahead DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1271 1 and expand the foundation just like they did with -- 2 THE COURT: Sure, we need to do that. Let me 3 look at this. What I'm concerned about is that I don't 4 know that anybody should -- is in a position to testify 5 that extrajudicial killing and torture is okay. 6 MR. BROOKE: He won't testify to that. 7 THE COURT: Well, I mean he says such 8 provocation made the national armed forces react at the 9 political leaders performing this Constitution admission, 10 so forth, rejecting the -- and affording -- there's some 11 interesting way he has worded things. Progress of 12 economic disgrace should advance -- I'm just not -- could 13 advance as well as the possibility of disgrace could 14 change to a system like the one up to now. Some countries 15 such as Cuba and -- it is awkwardly worded, I mean, but 16 that's okay. I mean this is -- 17 MR. BROOKE: He's not going to in any way 18 condone any of the violence that has been discussed in 19 this lawsuit, Your Honor. 20 THE COURT: Let's see if we can flesh out his 21 background a little better. The objection is that usually 22 in a report you have conclusions, it is sort of like 23 points, bullet points that are to be made, however you 24 want to say it, and the person is in the position because 25 of their study and experience and so forth to testify DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1272 1 regarding, and it seemed to emphasize that he would be 2 talking about the law and that he's a lawyer who is going 3 to give some opinions in that regard, so this is a little 4 confusing. Why don't we go ahead and see what he would 5 say in terms of what he knows from personal experience or 6 study. 7 (The following proceedings were had in open 8 court.) 9 MR. BROOKE: May I proceed, Your Honor? 10 THE COURT: You may. 11 BY MR. BROOKE: 12 Q. Sir, during your studies at the university and your 13 courses that you have taught, have you taught the history of 14 El Salvador and the civil war background of your country? 15 A. The history concerning the facts or the courses that 16 can be known of in El Salvador are stories or history that 17 were taught to the students at the university as a result of 18 the armed conflict, because of the conflicts that took place 19 in such a small country. Every one at the university knew of 20 the conflicts, of the conflict that was happening, and we, as 21 deans, as directors, as teachers, as instructors, we had the 22 duty to order to advise these students concerning those acts 23 that were taking place, and also about the history of the 24 armed conflict in El Salvador. This thus allowed the 25 university students or my students could have a deeper DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1273 1 knowledge of the history. This, in turn, allowed that the 2 students themselves could thus strengthen their knowledge or 3 the roots of a country, of the conflicts that had taken place 4 of the conflicts that were happening up until the year 1990. 5 The time for students, the time for the youth was very 6 difficult, and they needed to know -- they wanted to know the 7 positions that the guerillas had taken and the position that 8 the army had taken. It was very important to define in the 9 students -- of course, not tell them what road to take, of 10 course, teach them how order should be maintained in the 11 Republic of El Salvador. And as a professor, it was my duty 12 to capture all of the information, all of the necessary 13 information, to collect the necessary information, to provide 14 this to the students' information because we had universities 15 where the youth was -- were being trained to become 16 professionals, but this was also an important area, and this 17 was an area that had to be made known as history, the history 18 of their own country, and this has allowed that El Salvador 19 has been able to involve up until now through this history, 20 and partly it is through that history, I have taken that 21 history, it is partly where I have taken the history of my own 22 experience, and through the media, the written press has 23 informed us daily -- every day they would inform us concerning 24 the events that were taking place. 25 Q. Sir, have you prepared a statement as to the historical DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1274 1 frame of the civil war in El Salvador? 2 A. Yes, I have prepared a statement on that frame -- 3 timeframe or framework of the insurgence of the insurgent 4 incidents that took place in El Salvador. It is necessary to 5 establish within this history concerning these facts -- ah, I 6 would like to speak on this portion. 7 MR. ESQUIVEL: Objection, Your Honor, this 8 witness is not qualified to give those opinions. 9 THE COURT: Let's talk about it briefly. 10 (The following proceedings had at side-bar 11 bench.) 12 THE COURT: It is a difficult situation because 13 I'm inclined to allow someone to speak in this area. 14 Certainly, I would like to be able to allow someone to 15 speak in this area, but it has to be demonstrated that 16 they do have a particular specialized knowledge acquired 17 in some method which would allow him to do that. 18 Obviously, the court has a role in precluding individuals 19 who simply wish to express their own personal opinion or 20 an opinion that is not an educated opinion, but simply a 21 point of view that they have acquired, not through an 22 appropriate process, otherwise, it simply allows 23 individuals to express their own personal biases, and this 24 doesn't assist the jury. I haven't heard anything yet 25 that allows him to testify on this particular point. It DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1275 1 is a little confusing to me exactly what he's about to 2 say, so I don't know what he's going to say. But if it is 3 in this period of time which I haven't heard anything 4 which shows that he has by study or personal experience 5 from his own testimony, able to provide us with 6 information that would be helpful to the jury, I should 7 not allow it to occur, so that's my problem. 8 MR. BROOKE: Your Honor, I thought he had 9 testified that he had studied as well as taught the 10 historical background. 11 THE COURT: He's not telling me what he did. 12 It is like saying I went to school. You could say I went 13 to the University of Tennessee and I took some political 14 science courses, that wouldn't qualify you to give an 15 opinion. You have to show that you are someone who has 16 acquired expertise that will be useful to the jury. If a 17 person came in and said, you know, I visited the medical 18 school, I wouldn't let them give a medical opinion. Or 19 even I attended the medical school, but I didn't study 20 medicine. He has not told me that he studied, that he 21 engaged in some course of study that would -- 22 MR. BROOKE: I think it's a communication 23 problem. I will just draw it out some more, if I can. 24 THE COURT: He did study the law, and he can 25 tell us about the law, and he -- I have no question, no DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1276 1 doubt that he can tell us about the organic law of El 2 Salvador, and he can tell us how it works and he -- I 3 think he can probably tell us its history, those things, 4 he can do those things. To express an opinion on history 5 is a cross discipline. I'm having trouble -- 6 MR. BROOKE: If I may ask a few more questions, 7 I think it is a lack of communication. 8 THE COURT: Am I missing -- 9 MR. ESQUIVEL: No, you're not missing it, Your 10 Honor, and -- 11 THE COURT: I tried to listen carefully because 12 my preference is always allow someone to testify if it can 13 be demonstrated that they have an appropriate basis from 14 which to testify and there is not some fundamental problem 15 with their methodology. You have to make sure that there 16 is a reasonable and sound methodology in place. I have 17 not heard that at this point in time. We can talk about 18 all the things we consider in experts, but that's -- 19 MR. ESQUIVEL: And if Mr. Brooke is going to 20 elicit more qualifications, the witness is very confusing 21 on these points, may I have the opportunity to voir dire 22 the witness as to his qualifications -- 23 THE COURT: You're allowed to. 24 MR. ESQUIVEL: -- because I think some of these 25 things could be clarified in voir dire. DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1277 1 THE COURT: Well, let's do that. Let's allow 2 you a little more time to develop some qualifications, 3 because you really want him to go through this historic 4 background? 5 MR. BROOKE: It's a communication problem. 6 MR. EISENBRANDT: It certainly isn't a matter 7 of communication, the interpretation is perfectly fine. 8 His answers in Spanish are just as confusing as they are 9 in English. 10 THE COURT: Well, also, I have one of my clerks 11 who speaks Spanish in the back and she has been listening 12 in, and she has been commenting that the translation seems 13 very capable -- 14 MR. BROOKE: I'm not saying the translation, I 15 am saying the confusion between me and him. 16 THE COURT: I feel you should be given an 17 opportunity to show an adequate background. 18 (The following proceedings were had in open 19 court.) 20 THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, one of the 21 questions in determining expert testimony whether an 22 individual can or cannot provide expert testimony is 23 showing an adequate basis in methodology, study, 24 background, education and so forth that would allow a 25 person to give an opinion as an expert, and it is clear DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1278 1 that this witness has been able to demonstrate expertise 2 in the area of the law, and the organic law of El 3 Salvador, but these questions relate to history, and 4 that's why we're having this discussion because until that 5 can be demonstrated it is not possible for the court under 6 the rules to allow that particular testimony. So 7 Mr. Brooke did want an additional opportunity because it 8 is an appropriate area for inquiry, and then Mr. Esquivel 9 may have some voir dire questions. We're going to follow 10 that process, which is what we often do, which is allowing 11 both sides to make inquiry as to qualifications in a 12 particular area, and that's what they're doing right now. 13 BY MR. BROOKE: 14 Q. Sir, have you studied history, the history of your 15 country? 16 A. We have studied the history of our country. We have 17 analyzed the history and the events that have taken place 18 since 1970. We have covered part of this history in each one 19 of the stages of our life. While gathering this history, we 20 have documented ourselves in order to establish the 21 appropriate knowledge regarding our roots in order to define 22 what it was that was happening and really understand which was 23 the meeting point of that history. The knowledge of this 24 history of our country regarding these events has allowed us 25 to be here so that we can clarify those facts, those facts DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1279 1 that did involve and affect many persons. That is why I must 2 consider that my person has indeed gathered this information 3 in order to communicate it to this jury. 4 Q. What did you study in your university courses or what 5 did you study in the courses that you have taught relating to 6 the history of your country? 7 A. We have studied on the instructions of the military 8 code, the military structure. We studied the Constitution of 9 the Republic, which also establishes that in accordance with 10 Article 202 of the Constitution of the Republic has the duty 11 of protecting the sovereignty of El Salvador. Protection of 12 sovereignty is bestowed, the responsibility is bestowed upon 13 the armed forces of El Salvador. We have also studied the San 14 Jose Pact which allows the treaties and the rights and the 15 agreements in such cases would be respectable, would be 16 extended and conveyed as a country to each one of the persons, 17 that those violations would not continue, that these histories 18 and these treaties have been incorporated as teachings in the 19 Universities of El Salvador so that the student may 20 understand, so that history may be a witness to those facts 21 which they lived through even though they were young in age. 22 We have gathered information from newspapers as well. The 23 media has reported a lot regarding the facts, regarding the 24 armed conflicts in El Salvador. By the same token, the 25 written press, the televised press, radio have also reported DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1280 1 on these facts that have taken place in El Salvador. This 2 brought me with great interest to document myself or to inform 3 myself, not as a formal writer, but perhaps as an expert in 4 knowledge only, but this has introduced us to defining the 5 situation which the country had during the war and how the 6 country today is involved in a democratic evolution, an 7 evolution in which economic development, social development, 8 legal development, which is the important basis of the country 9 has been continued. There are many friendly countries that 10 have also extended their hands to El Salvador so that 11 international relations and the relations between friendly 12 countries have continued to help El Salvador's development. 13 The United States is a friend of El Salvador, so much so that 14 up to this date, it has not left El Salvador by itself. It 15 has always helped in its policies, has supported their 16 military policies, economic policies, legal reform, agrarian 17 reform or land reform. The United States has been a right 18 hand for El Salvador. And why? Because the changes that took 19 place back then in 1972 -- 1982 in the peace treaties have 20 strengthened the position of the country of El Salvador. 21 Q. When you use the term we informed ourselves, do you 22 include yourself as I? 23 A. That is so. 24 Q. Have you studied and reviewed all of those items that 25 you have just referred to yourself? DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1281 1 A. That is so. 2 Q. Have you taught these materials to students? 3 A. We have taught these courses to students. We have 4 taught this information to the students so that they will 5 understand and so that the ideas are clear as to history. We 6 have spoken about peace treaties signed in Mexico. We saw how 7 these treaties were organized in 1992. They were signed by 8 Felix Cristiani who was in power since '89 in El Salvador. 9 Very important deeds during which the position of the 10 president of the republic, Cristiani was very important. As 11 to that group of persons that were headed by Commander Chafic 12 Handal, Commander Villalobos, Mr. -- Leonel -- I can't recall 13 his name. At this point, we can understand that the gentlemen 14 like Chafic Handal who was the main leader of the FMLN, the 15 Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front, with very -- well, 16 not so clearly understood thoughts, he had -- well, he wanted 17 power, and he was in charge of those forces from the Farabundo 18 Marti National Liberation Front, the FMLN, and he came to 19 Mexico and they sat -- they explained their points because the 20 United Nations said they should sit down, define and reach an 21 agreement. This has also allowed that the peace treaties for 22 the peace agreements were brought to the students' tables or 23 desks just as the persons who were working on these peace 24 agreements, Onusal or Acnur, had offices installed in El 25 Salvador to verify the complaints and the damages that were DIRECT - JOSE ARAUJO 1282 1 being caused in each one of the municipalities or towns in El 2 Salvador, and this drives us to understand or makes me 3 understand as well as to the students that there was an 4 organization that was very busy with trying to solve that 5 armed conflict in the country. Also, under side in El 6 Salvador to the Geneva Conventions in which the treaties 7 dictate that all guaranties to life, to health, to nutrition, 8 for medication which are all human rights must be respected, 9 and all Salvadorans -- all Salvadoran citizens should enjoy. 10 All of these pieces of knowledge have been brought to the 11 universities where I have been a professor in the history of 12 El Salvador. 13 Q. Have you taught the history of the civil war of El 14 Salvador that occurred between 1970 to 1992? 15 A. That is so. We have indeed taught. 16 MR. BROOKE: Tender the witness. 17 THE COURT: Voir dire? 18 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION 19 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 20 Q. Mr. Araujo, you have studied agronomy engineering, is 21 that correct? 22 A. That is so. 23 Q. And you have studied theology and you have had other 24 religious courses of study? 25 A. I have a professor in theological sciences in El VOIR DIRE - JOSE ARAUJO 1283 1 Salvador, which I got over a term of three years, in biblical 2 studies of the Assemblies of God, which are an organization 3 recognized in El Salvador. 4 Q. And in 1998, you received a law degree, is that 5 correct? 6 A. I got a degree in legal sciences, and then in 1999, we 7 went to the Supreme Court of Justice to be sworn in and, 8 therefore, authorized to be an attorney in the republic and 9 deal with the law, with the laws that are established in our 10 nation. 11 Q. And your degree is from an institution that is called 12 the Military University of El Salvador, is that right? 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. You do not have a degree in history, do you, sir? 15 A. No. 16 Q. And the only year that you served as a professor is 17 1999, the year after your graduation from the military 18 university, isn't that right? 19 A. It is correct only about Military University of El 20 Salvador. However, you may obtain my curriculum vitae or my 21 vitae indicating that I have also taught at the University of 22 the Assemblies of God, and later at the Evangelical University 23 of El Salvador. There are two other universities. First, the 24 University of the Assemblies of God and, secondly, in response 25 to these questions, the Evangelical University of El Salvador. VOIR DIRE - JOSE ARAUJO 1284 1 Q. Now, your courses at the Assembly of God University and 2 at the Evangelical University are primarily religious 3 instruction, is that right? 4 A. That is not correct. The courses we taught at the 5 Evangelical Universities are courses for legal degrees. These 6 are the courses we were teaching at the end of the curriculum, 7 and in my curriculum vitae, you should see the courses I was 8 teaching. It's forensic speech, legal speech, penal law, 9 penal process of law, legal librarian processes, which is also 10 a very important course for the students. There has not been 11 an opportunity to have that theological training for the 12 students. However, in 1991, in my curriculum vitae, you can 13 find that I was working at the Christian school, in which I 14 taught Christian courses. At that one, I did. 15 Q. And according to your resume at that school, you taught 16 Christian courses for two years from kindergarten to ninth 17 grade, is that correct? 18 A. That is correct. 19 Q. And the courses that you just referred to at the 20 Assemblies of God and the Evangelical University, those were 21 law related courses, they were not history courses? 22 A. That is correct. 23 Q. Now, Mr. Araujo, so the one year that you taught at the 24 Military University, what was the name of the course that you 25 taught or the courses that you taught that year? VOIR DIRE - JOSE ARAUJO 1285 1 A. Would you allow me to help myself? 2 Q. Absolutely. 3 A. Well, when we started with these students, our 4 teachings, they were civilian and military. We taught them or 5 instructed them regarding the teachings of the army, the 6 regulations of the army, which was the main basis of the 7 doctrine. We know that on that important basis for military 8 students as well as the civilian ones, doctrine was due to 9 obedience, and obedience to the laws and the regulations and 10 the norms established by the organic law itself. We also 11 taught them about the military code. We taught these students 12 to respect the human being. We taught them to behave in the 13 proper manner because upon committing a criminal action, they 14 would incur punishable deeds, and the punishable deeds as 15 established by the procedures in the military code are the 16 procedures of courts as were penalties of a top degree, as 17 well as there were some other penalties, accessory penalties 18 and other military penalties. In accordance to the army's 19 regulations, it could be established in Article -- or excuse 20 me, in the military code, we could see it under Article 8. We 21 will tell students that the penalties were important. There 22 was death penalty, there was reclusion, and there was 23 detention or imprisonment. Under the accessory ones found in 24 the same code, we have military destitution, suspension of job 25 or removal from the job and suspension of command. All of VOIR DIRE - JOSE ARAUJO 1286 1 these things, all of these articles were important for the 2 instruction of the military students in the university. Of 3 course, such instructions, they already had from their 4 training in military school. University, which was a superior 5 level of study, they came to acquire a different condition to 6 the rank that they may have gotten at the military school. 7 The university was for them to seek a profession, a better 8 standard of living, and among those better standards of 9 living, the students would be prepared in legal sciences. 10 This could not remove from us the responsibility of teaching 11 them things that they might have already been taught at the 12 school. We still have to teach them about these things. It 13 could not leave us outside because it was our responsibility 14 as a university, which was attempting to train all these 15 professionals, we have to comply with it. Even being academic 16 administrator, I would verify each one of the files of the 17 students so that they would meet the necessary requirements 18 for vocational courses that they would complete and that they 19 would actually study for them to have access to a superior 20 level. These teachings have served to prepare today those 21 military young men that serve the Salvadoran government. 22 Q. Mr. Araujo, please, let me try again, and let me ask 23 you, please, to focus on my question. During the one year 24 that you served as a professor at the military university, 25 what was the name of the course that you taught? VOIR DIRE - JOSE ARAUJO 1287 1 A. Well, we taught during that year penal procedural law 2 and military procedures. That way, they would be prepared to 3 qualify for a degree in political sciences -- 4 THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry, in legal sciences, 5 the interpreter corrects himself. 6 A. They were here seeking training so that they could opt 7 for a profession after they went out or after they had served 8 the armed forces. They had an option for a professional 9 career, so they had that pensum of courses in order to prepare 10 themselves. And I repeat, the course that we were preparing 11 these students for is penal procedural law. 12 MR. ESQUIVEL: Your Honor, I have no further 13 voir dire questions. 14 THE COURT: Let me ask a question of counsel at 15 side bar. Is there any other voir dire at this time? 16 MR. BROOKE: No, Your Honor. 17 THE COURT: If you will bring me a copy of the 18 resume. Do you have an English translation? 19 MR. ESQUIVEL: I think I was only provided a 20 Spanish version. 21 THE COURT: I was looking through all my 22 materials and my computer material to see if I could find 23 more information on the witness because I don't want to 24 fail to look at something that I should look at. I know 25 his resume was not tendered for his review -- 1288 1 Why don't you -- obviously, we need to have at 2 least 10 minutes, so why don't you take a 15-minute recess 3 room? We will see you in 15 minutes. Thanks so much for 4 letting me know. 5 (The following proceedings had at side-bar 6 bench.) 7 THE COURT: I want to make sure we have got 8 everything. There is a preference in the law to allow a 9 person to testify. At the same time, Daubert applies 10 equally to non-scientific experts as other experts, and I 11 have already said he can testify in the area of law 12 questions. He can testify about the organic law of the 13 State of El Salvador, and there may be some other things 14 he needs to talk about in that regard. 15 Now, nobody submitted the resume at this point, 16 so should I mark it or do something with it? I can look 17 at it briefly, I'm not sure what it -- 18 MR. BROOKE: I don't know what it can tell you, 19 Your Honor. 20 THE COURT: Well, I took some years of Spanish, 21 but I'm not going to pretend that I know it all. 22 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, if there is 23 anything in there, I will be happy to tell you or Mr. 24 Esquivel. 25 THE COURT: I will either have you or 1289 1 Ms. Polansky to run through it, but -- well, no one has 2 offered an English language translation or an agreed upon 3 translation. Obviously, he has been to a number of 4 activities, he has been to meetings and that sort of 5 thing. 6 MR. ESQUIVEL: Your Honor, I believe that his 7 resume is consistent with the testimony he gave, which is 8 that the courses he has given at the Military University 9 and at the Assembly of God University and the Evangelical 10 University are legal courses, they're based on criminal 11 process, criminal codes. He has testified about the 12 military ordinances, the Constitution of the national 13 defense law. He has not taught history, he's not a 14 historian, he doesn't even have a degree in history, so 15 he's not qualified to render opinions about history. We 16 do not object to his offering opinions about the national 17 defense law or the military -- 18 THE COURT: He described several things, the 19 Constitution and so forth. Let's mark as Exhibit A -- I 20 don't know if we have an A. 21 THE CLERK: We do. 22 THE COURT: Joe, we're going to make his 23 resume, which is in Spanish, but I think it is of some 24 help of anybody looking through as B in the case. It 25 won't be -- it is just received so -- it was not offered 1290 1 by anybody else, but I think it is probably useful in 2 terms of at least completing the record. 3 Now, does somebody want to submit the report as 4 C in the case, because, remember, these documents are 5 not -- 6 MR. BROOKE: Yes, Your Honor. 7 THE COURT: I mean we don't have to, but I 8 don't have a complete record. 9 MR. EISENBRANDT: Are you referring to 10 admitting it as evidence, Your Honor? 11 THE COURT: No, no, it's a C, these are just to 12 complete the record, they're not for the jury, but I think 13 we are talking about it, and I feel uncomfortable not 14 having it in the record. It may be important to all of 15 you at a later point. 16 MR. BROOKE: So that portion of Exhibit C for 17 identification which references the historical frame of 18 the civil war of El Salvador, we would tender as an offer 19 of proof for the record. 20 (Exhibit Number B was marked. Description: 21 CV of Jose Araujo.) 22 (Exhibit Number C was marked. Description: 23 Report.) 24 25 THE COURT: Right. I mean we -- and I think it 1291 1 has been referred to, and we need to get it in the case, 2 and you need to get your copy back, so let's make a copy 3 of this in the matter. 4 I have listened carefully, I made a lot of 5 notes, and I simply haven't heard anything in which he 6 indicates that he has what we would recognize as an 7 expertise in this historic area. He clearly has a lot -- 8 if he was coming in here to talk about most legal subjects 9 in El Salvador, he has had some pretty interesting 10 experience, it sounds like, and he has had some experience 11 with agriculture, it sounds like, he hasn't talked about 12 that a lot, but he has got some background on that. He 13 has a background clearly in the law and he can testify on 14 all those subjects he talked about. He went through and 15 listed things that he had taught, he listed things that he 16 had -- and, you know, I've studied military code, military 17 structure, Constitution of the republic, the section that 18 he referred to, the San Jose Pact, and he went through 19 some specific things. Really, in this area, the only 20 thing that he's telling me that he has in this broader 21 subject area, it seemed to me, to be the newspaper, which 22 he did refer to several times in his testimony, media 23 reports, radio and television reports. That's usually not 24 the basis for expert testimony. It is usually study, 25 interviews, detailed papers that have been written. I did 1292 1 not notice in his resume, and it may be there, we need to 2 look at it a little more, he's not written in the area at 3 all, as far as I can tell. He didn't say that he had 4 written in the area at all. So the things that we usually 5 look to to determine when somebody can offer expert 6 testimony are unclear in this record. 7 MR. BROOKE: Your Honor, he is going to testify 8 about eyewitness events, things that he has seen also. 9 THE COURT: He can do that based on personal 10 knowledge. 11 MR. BROOKE: When I said there is a 12 communication problem, I think when counsel asked him what 13 courses have you taught, to you and I as a simple 14 question, straightforward, he, apparently, it seems like, 15 is talking about the scope of a course versus a class. 16 THE COURT: That's probably right. 17 MR. BROOKE: And I'm seeing -- and so I would 18 like to just talk to him a second with somebody to try to 19 get him to see if, in fact, we're missing something. 20 THE COURT: Right, I mean has he taught a 21 course on the history of El Salvador for the period -- 22 MR. BROOKE: That's what I was trying to ask. 23 THE COURT: We have sort of had a couple of 24 shots at it. 25 MR. EISENBRANDT: And his responses have been 1293 1 we, rather than I. 2 MR. BROOKE: And that is why I kept responding 3 when you say are you referring to I, yourself. 4 THE COURT: I think you have been as thorough 5 as you can be. 6 Other statements from the plaintiffs' side? 7 MR. ESQUIVEL: I don't think so. 8 MS. BLUM: I just want to clarify one thing 9 that you were saying, Mr. Brooke, are you suggesting that 10 you want to consult with your witness during the break? 11 MR. BROOKE: Yeah, And I have no objection to 12 counsel -- 13 THE COURT: I think he probably can ask him, am 14 I misunderstanding you, I just -- but I agree with you, it 15 is a difficult thing, because the rule has been called 16 for, and usually we're very careful in that regard. I 17 think the concern is that he has misperceived. Clearly, 18 he's not answering the questions that you're asking him, 19 and we do have excellent interpreters, I don't really feel 20 like that it is at all the interpreter. Actually, there's 21 some immigration law cases and district court cases about 22 interpreter problems, but we just don't have one here. 23 MR. EISENBRANDT: We certainly don't. 24 MS. BLUM: I just would like to state that this 25 is the third opportunity that the defendant's counsel has 1294 1 had to work with this witness. They had an expert report 2 prepared, they had him here for a deposition. He has been 3 here for several days for testimony preparation and, you 4 know, they have had ample opportunity to work with this 5 witness to clarify the scope of his testimony. So, you 6 know, if you want to go have -- I think either Mr. 7 Esquivel or Eisenbrandt to accompany you to have a very 8 brief conversation with your witness, but I think it is 9 clear that they have had a lot of opportunity to work with 10 their witness to help him testify in a way that would 11 eliminate the issues for the jury. 12 MR. BROOKE: Well, the -- there was no motion 13 in limine or anything to give us a heads up that there was 14 going to be any problem. This, I thought, the historical 15 issue was the simplest issue, there's no -- 16 MR. EISENBRANDT: The burden is certainly not 17 on the plaintiffs. 18 MR. ESQUIVEL: The pretrial order does say that 19 we intended to object to any expert testimony beyond the 20 national defense law. 21 THE COURT: And I understood it to be that -- 22 MR. BROOKE: Okay. 23 THE COURT: -- situation. So I don't think it 24 is a -- I don't think that's the issue. I think it is not 25 unfair to -- if the two of you, if you want to just say do 1295 1 we have a miscommunication here, and you know, is there a 2 course that you taught on history during this timeframe 3 or -- you know, you speak Spanish too. 4 MR. EISENBRANDT: Yes, sir. 5 THE COURT: I think it will give everybody -- 6 fairness is very, very important. 7 MR. BROOKE: We're trying to get to the truth. 8 THE COURT: There is a preference -- I'm going 9 to say this for the eighth time, there's a preference, and 10 in most situations individuals end up being qualified as 11 experts, and then the jury makes credibility 12 determinations, so I'm not -- thus far, we haven't gotten 13 over that hill, we haven't made it. 14 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, what I would 15 request is if we can also have one of the interpreters 16 join us just as a third part to translate. 17 THE COURT: Oh, sure. When we come back -- if 18 there is nothing else, we're going to take our break, and 19 we need -- I think we are losing a little scheduled time 20 today, so we will try to get back on schedule. 21 MR. FARGARSON: Just so we don't keep coming up 22 here, he can testify about facts within his personal 23 knowledge? 24 THE COURT: If it is relevant. I mean if it 25 is -- 1296 1 MR. FARGARSON: Okay. 2 THE COURT: If it is about the amnesty law, 3 which he's not said he going to testify about, that would 4 be an issue -- 5 MR. FARGARSON: No, no, we understand even -- 6 the court has ruled the amnesty law and the fact that it's 7 a fact -- 8 THE COURT: Right, right, okay. I think we 9 have covered it very well. 10 MS. BLUM: Thank you very much. 11 THE COURT: We're going to take 10 minutes. 12 MR. EISENBRANDT: Ten minutes, thank you, sir. 13 (The following proceedings were had in open 14 court.) 15 THE COURT: We're going to take ten minutes, 16 Mr. Ruby. They do have one more thing to wrap up, so 17 somebody tell the jury that they're still working and we 18 will have at least ten minutes. 19 THE COURT SECURITY OFFICER: Yes, sir. 20 (Recess taken.) 21 THE COURT: Has our position changed at all? I 22 need to ask one question about the Chavez claims, has that 23 now been modified by the plaintiffs? 24 MR. EISENBRANDT: Yes, the claims of Ms. Chavez 25 will be only the extrajudicial killing claim. 1297 1 THE COURT: That's a change, obviously. 2 MR. EISENBRANDT: Yes, Your Honor, we were 3 prepared to discuss that with Your Honor in terms of the 4 jury instructions. 5 THE COURT: Okay. Well, we will -- obviously, 6 you have chosen to now not assert the two other claims. 7 MR. EISENBRANDT: That's correct. 8 THE COURT: And only pursue the extrajudicial 9 killing. 10 MR. EISENBRANDT: That's correct. 11 THE COURT: And that eliminates the -- some of 12 the instructions then because -- 13 MR. ESQUIVEL: Because there's no torture claim 14 left in the case, Your Honor, that's right. 15 THE COURT: That's what I understand. Okay. 16 Well, we need to make that clear, because I wasn't sure. 17 Did you discuss that with opposing counsel? 18 MR. EISENBRANDT: Your Honor, this was a 19 decision arrived at this morning, and we haven't had a 20 chance to -- 21 THE COURT: I thought Mr. Brooke probably 22 wanted to know about it, and Mr. Fargarson, because it 23 would take a little bit of reading to be comfortable that 24 you -- that is what you were saying, and that's what we 25 need to -- that is certainly appropriate. If the party 1298 1 wishes to not pursue a particular claim, that party may do 2 so in the case. And in this case, Ms. Chavez's claim will 3 be restricted to extrajudicial killing and the other two 4 claims will be withdrawn. Now, it has to be somewhat by 5 agreement under Rule 41, but I take it that the defense 6 has no objection to the withdrawing of those two claims 7 by Ms. Chavez, or at least we have to recognize that it is 8 being done. Any objection from the defense to the 9 withdrawing of the human rights abuse -- 10 MR. EISENBRANDT: I'm sorry, Your Honor, the 11 crimes against humanity and the torture. 12 THE COURT: The crimes against humanity and 13 torture claims of Ms. Chavez, I'm sorry. 14 MR. FARGARSON: No. 15 THE COURT: We needed to clear that up. We 16 have been trying to figure things out. We have another 17 set of proposed instructions, and we noticed that. Well, 18 that takes care of that. 19 There's no other submittal as to the expert 20 credentials. The witness, of course, will be accepted as 21 an expert on the legal subjects that he was previously 22 accepted as an expert on. And on the question of history 23 questions, he will not be accepted as an expert in that 24 regard for all the reasons that we have discussed. Thanks 25 very much. 1299 1 MR. BROOKE: Thank you, Your Honor. 2 All right. We're ready to bring the panel in. 3 (Jury in.) 4 THE COURT: All right. You may be seated, and 5 we have been able to resolve those matters, and the 6 witness is excepted as an expert on those legal subjects 7 that we were previously discussed, which includes a number 8 of things including the legal code of El Salvador, the 9 Constitution during that period of time, the organic law 10 of El Salvador, those items. 11 On the question of history, we have gone 12 through those credentials carefully, of course, and that 13 was the issue that we were discussing, and that is an area 14 in which I have ruled in favor of plaintiffs and will not 15 be receiving expert testimony on the history questions in 16 the matter. Anything else? I think we're ready to 17 proceed. 18 MR. BROOKE: Ready, Your Honor. 19 DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) 20 BY MR. BROOKE: 21 Q. Sir, when the first junta was put in on October the 22 15th, 1979, who were the two military members of the junta? 23 A. Colonel Majano and Mr. Abdul Guiterrez. 24 Q. And you said there were three civilian members of the 25 junta, and beneath the junta was -- DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1300 1 THE INTERPRETER: Can counsel await the 2 response interpreted by the interpreter? Thank you, sir. 3 A. I do have them before me, and they formed part of this 4 junta. Mr. Ramon Mayorga Quiros, Guilleromo Manuel Ungo and 5 Mario Andino, they were the members of the revolutionary 6 government junta. 7 Q. And by December or early January, December of 1979, 8 early January, 1980, did the junta change membership? 9 A. This junta continued with the first members that 10 comprised it, they continued working with the difficulties of 11 the country, and they were able to establish many 12 arrangements, many orders in the country, many things changed 13 in the government institutions, they changed their ideology 14 and they had a new mentality and new administration with the 15 purpose of managing the resources generated by El Salvador 16 could be for the benefit of El Salvador. This allowed for the 17 command relationship that existed or the communication 18 relationship inside the junta between the military people and 19 the civilians would not -- it didn't stop having or showing 20 friction, it didn't stop having divisions as concerns -- as 21 pertains to the criteria concerning the steerage of the 22 country, and this allowed for friction amongst themselves. 23 This allowed for difficulties amongst them, and this allowed 24 this junta to have a countercoup, if we can say it that way, 25 and then there was a new junta at the time. DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1301 1 MR. ESQUIVEL: Your Honor, I'm sorry to 2 interpret, the witness is continuing to testify beyond his 3 area of expertise, and I move to strike this testimony in 4 this regard. 5 THE COURT: I have to sustain the objection. 6 Let's -- I hate to do this, but it is always very 7 important that we be absolutely fair to everybody, and so 8 rather than having -- let's talk about it again at side 9 bar one more time. 10 (The following proceedings had at side-bar 11 bench.) 12 MR. BROOKE: Your Honor, before asking my 13 question, I asked counsel can I ask him who the 14 composition of the junta was, and he said, oh, sure, it 15 was common knowledge, and so that was my question to him. 16 THE COURT: The problem is the response, it is 17 not your question. I mean your question is appropriate, 18 but the response is commentaries. 19 MR. ESQUIVEL: And I would have no objection to 20 matters of common knowledge like who are the members of 21 the junta. It's like he's going on about the 22 interrelationship between the members of the junta and 23 what the different ideologies were, all of that is not 24 within his personal knowledge or any area of expertise 25 that he has. DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1302 1 THE COURT: And he would have been very young 2 at the time. 3 MR. ESQUIVEL: That's correct. 4 MR. BROOKE: He's referring to the ancient 5 documents, he has got the newspapers in front of him 6 there. 7 MR. EISENBRANDT: I think that just makes the 8 point. 9 THE COURT: Right, and the difficulty is that 10 to the degree that we have information about the media, 11 internal media in the country at the time, it would not be 12 a source of -- you would have to examine it, you would 13 have to test it, you would have to -- if you were to 14 testify on it, you would have to make some intellectual 15 inquiry about its validity and so forth, and that's just 16 not what has occurred here, and he's not ever said that 17 that is what he did. So I'm going to sustain the 18 objection. And let me try to -- I'm not sure if it will 19 do any good, I can attempt to explain to the witness that 20 you're attempting to ask some very narrow questions which 21 should require very short answers, factual answers, and 22 you're not asking a broad question, and he should confine 23 himself to the question -- of course, I'm sure you have 24 told him that already. Perhaps my saying that will be of 25 assistance. DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1303 1 MS. BLUM: Can I just suggest that if the 2 witness has some sort of document in front of him, that 3 he's referring to that's -- 4 THE COURT: It is required to be disclosed to 5 the opposing side. 6 MS. BLUM: And that if the scope of his 7 testimony is going to be restricted to the legal documents 8 and he wants to have a copy of the organic law or counsel 9 wants to consult with us to bring up a section of the 10 organic law, that's one thing, but I believe he's looking 11 through a whole analysis, a newspaper clipping or 12 something, and essentially reading from that. 13 MR. BROOKE: He's not supposed to do that. 14 THE COURT: All right. Let's get back. 15 (The following proceedings were had in open 16 court.). 17 THE COURT: I did sustain the objection in 18 light of -- and it may be useful to explain to the witness 19 who is used to somewhat a different system, that counsel 20 is asking very narrow fact questions at this time and -- 21 which require very short answers, such as the 22 identification of particular individuals, as opposed to a 23 discussion of either history or political philosophy. And 24 then if Mr. Brooke requires a more expansive answer, he 25 will then so indicate. Is that a satisfactory way in DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1304 1 which to proceed? 2 THE WITNESS: Correct. 3 THE COURT: Thank you very much. 4 BY MR. BROOKE: 5 Q. Did the membership of the junta change in December 6 or -- of 1979 or January of 1980? 7 A. In January of 1980. 8 Q. And did Napoleon Duarte become a member of the junta? 9 A. He was a member of that junta at that time. 10 Q. Did Napoleon Duarte become president in 1985 through 11 1989? 12 A. That is so. 13 Q. Did you have occasion to witness fighting or skirmishes 14 with weapons between guerillas and the military? 15 A. Please repeat the question. 16 Q. Did you have occasion to personally witness fighting 17 and skirmishes with weapons between the military and 18 guerillas? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Where did you witness this? 21 A. At the City of San Salvador. 22 Q. And what buildings were involved? 23 A. The buildings were the University of El Salvador, the 24 State University, the building for the Administration of Aqua 25 Ducts and Sewer, ANDA, A-N-D-A, and between these buildings DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1305 1 there is a road. 2 Q. Did the guerillas have weapons? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Did you have occasion to see any skirmishes or fights 5 between the guerrillas and the military? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Where was that location and which buildings were 8 involved? 9 A. As always, at the University of El Salvador. 10 Q. And did you go in -- ever have occasion to go into the 11 University Building at the University of El Salvador? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Were there weapons in the university -- on the premise 14 of the property that you observed? 15 A. There were weapons. 16 Q. Were there tunnels from the university to the church? 17 A. That is so. 18 Q. In the organic law of El Salvador, can you tell the 19 jury what the organic law is of El Salvador? 20 A. The organic law is a structure that is presented by the 21 ministry of defense, and in that organic law, firstly or 22 throughout the first line, if you will allow me -- or if you 23 allow me the organizational chart on the screen, I can explain 24 it. 25 Q. Can you explain to the jury -- well, first, let me ask, DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1306 1 did the law come into -- the new law come into effect in 1961? 2 A. That is so. 3 Q. And if you would, in 1979, 1980, was there a 4 Comandancia General De La Fuerza Armada? 5 A. That is so. 6 Q. Was that the junta? 7 A. That is so. 8 Q. Then in the office of the ministry of defense, was 9 there a minister of defense? 10 A. That is so. 11 Q. And was there within the office of the ministry of 12 defense an undersecretary or subminister of defense? 13 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter requests that 14 you repeat the last part of your question, undersecretary 15 or -- 16 BY MR. BROOKE: 17 Q. Subsecretary or subminister of defense. 18 A. An undersecretary. 19 Q. Did Article 26 of the organic law of the armed forces 20 provide the duties of the undersecretary? 21 A. It is not 6. 22 Q. 26, excuse me. 23 A. That is so, 26. 24 Q. Do you have a copy of Article 26 or do we need to show 25 it on the board for you to be able to read the Spanish? DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1307 1 A. Yes, I do believe I have a copy of Article 26. 2 Q. Will you please tell the jury what the three 3 responsibilities of the undersecretary of defense were? 4 A. The Article 26 establishes the responsibilities of the 5 undersecretary of defense of El Salvador. It is the 6 responsibility of the undersecretary of defense: 7 1. To provide technical advice to the minister of 8 defense in all matters concerning the branch. 9 2. To coordinate the technical function of the general 10 staff of the armed force with each of its different branches. 11 3. To propose to the minister of defense appointments, 12 removals, assignments, resignation acceptances and awarding of 13 leaves for functionaries and employees of the armed force. 14 Q. Sir, do you have an opinion based upon your training, 15 experience and studies as to whether or not the minister -- 16 the undersecretary of defense had any responsibility of 17 effective troop command? 18 A. The ministry of defense did not have a direct 19 responsibility with a troop. And this is all because the 20 relationship of the commander troops would mean operational 21 acts, and the undersecretary of defense was in the 22 administrative section as the undersecretary as is stipulated 23 by Article 26. He didn't have a command relationship with the 24 troops. The relationship established between the 25 undersecretary of defense was a link through the general DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1308 1 staff, which is a directive corps and the minister of defense. 2 So his was a relationship in which he would inform the 3 minister concerning administrative matters or the needs that 4 would emerge at each one of the branches of the general staff. 5 So the secretary, the undersecretary was the person who 6 carried these suggestions, these recommendations to the 7 minister, but as to a troop responsibility as could be stated 8 in this -- you cannot see that he had or that he had any 9 responsibility of the troops as the question has been 10 formulated. 11 Q. When Mr. Carranza was with ANTEL or SEL, which I 12 believe was the electric company, ANTEL being the 13 telecommunications company, would he have had any troop 14 command responsibility? 15 A. Colonel Carranza did not have under him or he did not 16 have troop responsibility when he was the president of ANTEL 17 and when he was the president of SEL because these were 18 government institutions that were -- and it was necessary to 19 manage them with administrative personnel to manage them for 20 the good functioning of electrical and telecommunication 21 services in El Salvador. It was not allowed that any person 22 in charge of these institutions were to have any relationships 23 with troops or to have troops under them or to have a command 24 relationship with troops, and while they were in those 25 positions, because these were important positions and they DIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1309 1 were public positions and, therefore, I must say that Colonel 2 Carranza served as a president, as a general manager of these 3 institutions that are the service of the state. 4 Q. When Colonel Carranza later became the general director 5 or the chief of the treasury police, would he have had command 6 responsibility of troops? 7 A. Colonel Carranza, as he was assigned to the treasury 8 police, logically, he was the person in charge of that corps 9 of the national police, so I must consider and say that by 10 following the organizational chart of national defense, he had 11 that command. You had the upper, and then other people 12 were -- they were his subordinates, he had that command, 13 correct. 14 Q. Do you know when Colonel Carranza had command of the 15 treasury police the approximate number of members of that 16 corps? 17 A. No. 18 Q. At any time during your life in El Salvador, have you 19 observed a death squad? 20 A. No. 21 MR. BROOKE: If I may have one minute, Your 22 Honor. 23 THE COURT: You may. 24 MR. BROOKE: Pass the witness, Your Honor. 25 THE COURT: Cross examination? CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1310 1 CROSS EXAMINATION 2 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 3 Q. Mr. Araujo, as I understand your testimony, you have 4 said that Colonel Carranza as the director of the treasury 5 police had command authority over all of the members of the 6 treasury police, is that right? 7 A. It is so. 8 MR. ESQUIVEL: Mr. Gibson, could you put up the 9 English version of that? 10 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 11 Q. And what you're referring to is the box on the bottom 12 right part of the military chain of command, is that correct, 13 sir? 14 A. Exactly. 15 Q. And this chain of command chart is attached to the 16 organic law of the national defense that you have been talking 17 about? 18 A. It is so. 19 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 20 Q. In 1980, Colonel Nicolas Carranza was the vice-minister 21 of defense, right? 22 A. He was not the defense minister. 23 Q. I'm sorry, I thought I said the vice-minister of 24 defense. Was he the vice-minister of defense? 25 THE INTERPRETER: My mistake, the interpreter CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1311 1 would like to correct himself. 2 THE COURT: Sure. 3 A. Correct. 4 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 5 Q. And as vice-minister of defense, he occupied a position 6 in the ministry of defense, is that right? 7 A. That is correct. 8 Q. And the ministry of defense, according to organic law, 9 is just below the commander in chief of the armed forces, is 10 that correct? 11 A. That is correct. 12 Q. Now, I thought I understood your testimony to be that 13 the ministry of defense was an administrative office and not a 14 part of the chain of command? 15 A. The ministry of defense, that is the second portion of 16 that chain of command where you have the vice-minister or 17 rather the undersecretary and the defense minister. 18 Q. So the members of the ministry of defense are within 19 the chain of command in the Salvadoran military, aren't they? 20 A. That is correct. 21 Q. And that means that the members of the ministry of 22 defense have command responsibilities, isn't that right? 23 THE INTERPRETER: Your Honor, I would like an 24 explanation as to a term. 25 THE COURT: Certainly. CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1312 1 A. The ministry of defense does have a command 2 responsibility with regards to the defense ministry, but it 3 also grants the undersecretary of defense in those days, and 4 this merits an explanation, to explain regarding the points 5 about administrative responsibility of the undersecretary. It 6 is true that there is an established chain of command, but one 7 executive portion where troops did not exist, nor was it held 8 by Mr. Colonel Carranza. 9 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 10 Q. Well, let's take a look at that, Mr. Araujo. Let's 11 look at Article 26 of the organic law which provides the 12 duties of the subsecretary of defense or the vice-minister of 13 defense. The third responsibility or duty of the subsecretary 14 of defense under this law is to propose appointments, is that 15 one of the duties? 16 A. It is so. 17 Q. And the subsecretary of defense also had the duty to 18 propose removal of members of the armed forces? 19 A. He makes recommendation. 20 Q. And the subsecretary of defense also proposes the 21 assignments for the members of the armed forces? 22 A. No, not that. 23 Q. Are you saying that's not contained in the third 24 portion of Article 26? Do you want to revise your answer, 25 Mr. Araujo? CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1313 1 A. Please, the question. Could you repeat the question? 2 Q. Does the vice-minister of defense have the duty to 3 propose assignments for members of the armed forces? 4 MR. FARGARSON: Your Honor, excuse me for a 5 second. 6 THE COURT: Let me let the interpreters consult 7 for a second. 8 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, sir, that is what I 9 would like. 10 THE COURT: We will take a moment and let them 11 consult. 12 (The interpreters conferred with each other.) 13 THE INTERPRETER: And, Your Honor, the 14 interpreter would like to change a word in his previous 15 interpretation, instead of missions or assignments, in 16 interpreting into Spanish, I used the word missions. In 17 the original document in Spanish, it says destinations. 18 THE COURT: Certainly. Would you reinterpret 19 and let's get the response to the question as originally 20 intended? 21 THE INTERPRETER: I have the question recorded, 22 I will go over it and change that word. 23 THE COURT: Certainly. 24 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you. 25 A. Yes. CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1314 1 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 2 Q. Now, let's look at the second part of the 3 subsecretary's duties, and that involves the coordination of 4 the technical functions, correct? 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. Now, under the second part, one of the duties of the 7 subsecretary of defense was to insure the discipline of all 8 members of the armed forces, isn't that correct? 9 A. I would like to help myself with the materials I have 10 in order to explain point number two. 11 Q. Well, if you would answer my question first and then, 12 please, consult your materials. 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. So the answer is yes, under this article, the 15 subsecretary of defense had a duty to insure the discipline 16 among the members of the armed forces? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. And the armed forces at that time included the security 19 forces, did they not? 20 A. No. 21 Q. The armed forces of El Salvador in 1980 did not include 22 the three branches of the security forces, is that what you're 23 saying, sir? 24 A. Forgive me, the question, can you repeat it again, sir, 25 so I can give you a more clear answer? CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1315 1 Q. Sure. Did the armed forces in El Salvador in 1980 2 include the three branches of the security forces? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. So in 1980, the subsecretary of defense had the duty 5 under this provision to insure discipline among the members of 6 the security forces, is that right? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Mr. Araujo, I thought you just told us that under this 9 section, the subsecretary of defense had a duty to insure 10 discipline among members of the security forces? 11 A. Yes, I said that he could insure discipline, but we 12 have to bear in mind that the armed forces were so large 13 whereas he was in a small office, how could he, well, have 14 control. In order to have control of an army, it was very 15 difficult, very complicated. I'm not going to say that there 16 was no discipline, yes, there was discipline in the military, 17 we can establish that -- that he could -- well, please excuse 18 me, may I have the question? 19 Q. Sir, the question is simply whether the subsecretary of 20 defense in El Salvador under the law of El Salvador had a duty 21 to insure discipline among the troops under his command? 22 A. Yes, yes. 23 Q. And Colonel Carranza -- 24 A. Has a duty. 25 Q. And Colonel Carranza was the subsecretary of in El CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1316 1 Salvador in 1980, is that correct? 2 A. It is so. 3 Q. And so in 1980, Colonel Carranza had the responsibility 4 and the duty under this law to insure the discipline of the 5 armed forces of El Salvador, is that right? 6 A. That is correct. 7 Q. And if Colonel Carranza did not maintain discipline 8 among the troops, he would have been in violation of his 9 duties under Article 26, isn't that right? 10 A. Indeed, that is not correct in the case of my answer. 11 Q. Well, would you please explain how that is not correct? 12 A. It is not so because the position of Mr. Colonel 13 Carranza was a link or a liaison between the state, or rather 14 the general staff, and the ministry of defense. He was a 15 second level of command on this part of the organizational 16 chart, and we cannot attribute responsibility, that is not 17 appropriate for Colonel Carranza; therefore, he was a 18 secretary, an administrative member of the staff who suggested 19 on the -- on the disciplinary matters on the administrative 20 part that each one of the units might be granted within the 21 armed forces. He would bring this information to the defense 22 minister. The defense minister would report to that 23 revolutionary government junta in order for them to make the 24 decision. These decisions regarding discipline exactly cannot 25 be attributed, even though it may seem contradictory as I have CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1317 1 told you awhile ago, cannot be attributed exactly that 2 responsibility to him. Why? Because he was a link between 3 the general staff and the minister of defense. 4 Q. But the fact that he served as a link does not get rid 5 of his independent duty under this section, as you have 6 testified, to insure discipline among the troops, does it? 7 A. In accordance with your question, I would like to 8 respond, and I would like you to allow me some space for me to 9 explain regarding that chain of command and then a portion of 10 the technical chain. 11 Q. If you would please answer the question first and then 12 explain your answer. 13 A. I could say yes. 14 Q. Now, would you like to explain? 15 A. The chain of command at that level, the link is a link 16 between officers through which all the orders and instructions 17 go down to the subordinate units; however, the technical chain 18 has its exceptions. The chain of command goes from commander 19 to commander within the units that the officers command. At 20 the general staff, they use the chain of command when they act 21 on behalf of the commander in chief. They have the links that 22 within the general staff, as we have already said, which is 23 the third portion of the organizational chart. From there, we 24 have information and command as established by the chain of 25 command. Please allow me to repeat. CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1318 1 Q. Well, before you repeat, Mr. Araujo, let me ask you 2 another question. 3 MR. BROOKE: Objection, Your Honor, the witness 4 has requested the opportunity to repeat. 5 THE COURT: The objection is sustained. 6 A. The military chain of command goes from commander to 7 commander within the authority that resides on the officers of 8 the general staff. We're talking about the general staff, 9 which is the third portion of that organizational chart. 10 Would you please show us that organizational chart so that I 11 can explain exactly where that chain of command lies so as to 12 make it clear my response to your question? 13 This third portion of the organizational chart shows 14 the general staff of the armed forces, and below the general 15 staff we have the rest of the forces, which include the army, 16 the air force, we have the navy, the national guard, national 17 police, treasury police. Each one of them has its own 18 commander of those six units below. The third unit of the 19 organizational chart includes commanders or directive corps 20 for the armed forces. They define also the policies for these 21 units that I have mentioned. The responsibility also of that 22 command comes from this group of the general staff of the 23 armed forces as stated by the concept. The chain of command 24 goes from commander to commander within the authorities that 25 reside then within those commands that they have. The CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1319 1 officers of the general staff use the chain of command when 2 they act on behalf of the commander. 3 The duty of the general staff of the armed forces was 4 to materialize or execute the policies designed by the 5 executive branch, materialize the policies of the -- 6 materialize the policies designed by the executive branch, 7 that is what the organic law of the armed forces states, but 8 it is explained in two different stages. The executive power 9 will be designed by the general command of the armed forces. 10 Of course, there was no precedent back then. It was the 11 revolutionary government junta that was existing, but the 12 article is clear in the sense that command came directly from 13 the general command. In that case was the revolutionary 14 government junta as in Article 39. 15 Q. Are you finished with your answer, sir? 16 A. Thank you. Thank you very much. 17 Q. Are you familiar with the military code of justice in 18 El Salvador? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. That's a document that governs the conduct of the 21 members of the armed forces of El Salvador, isn't it? 22 A. Yes, it is so. 23 Q. Did you consider the military code of justice in coming 24 to your conclusions in this case? 25 A. Yes. CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1320 1 Q. Do you know whether the military code of justice 2 provides any authority to the vice-minister or subsecretary of 3 defense? 4 A. Please, excuse me. 5 Q. Would you like me to ask the question again? 6 A. Please, excuse me, could you repeat the question? 7 Q. Yes, of course. Do you know whether the Salvadoran 8 code of military justice provides any authority to the 9 subsecretary or vice-minister of defense? 10 A. The military code is under the supervision of each one 11 of the ministers and vice-ministers, and they apply 12 supervision and behavior of every one in the military. 13 Q. Yes, sir. But do you know whether it provides any 14 authority to the subsecretary of defense? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Let me ask you to look at what has been marked as Trial 17 Exhibit 12. 18 MR. ESQUIVEL: Your Honor, may I approach the 19 witness? 20 THE COURT: You may. 21 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 22 Q. I've handed you the military code of justice, 23 Mr. Araujo, and it is in Spanish. Let me ask you to turn to 24 Article 186, please. Article 186 provides that certain 25 positions have the authority to make disciplinary punishments CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1321 1 on officers. Do you see that, sir? 2 A. It is so. 3 Q. And among the positions that has the authority to 4 discipline officers is the subsecretary or the undersecretary 5 of defense, is that right? 6 A. It is so. 7 Q. And you see that Article 186 gives only two people in 8 the Salvadoran military the authority to discipline officers 9 by terminating employment, do you see that? 10 A. It is so. 11 Q. And so under the Salvadoran code of military justice, 12 Colonel Carranza had the authority to punish officers, to 13 discipline officers who committed violations, isn't that 14 right? 15 A. That is correct. 16 Q. And Colonel Carranza was one of two people in the 17 Salvadoran military who were authorized to terminate the 18 employment of officers as a disciplinary punishment, isn't 19 that right? 20 A. That is correct. 21 Q. Now, you have reached your conclusions in this case by 22 reading the text of the national defense law, is that right? 23 A. Correct. 24 Q. You don't have knowledge of what Colonel Carranza 25 actually did while he served as vice-minister of defense? CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1322 1 A. I do have knowledge. 2 Q. What is that knowledge based on? 3 A. Well, I have mentioned earlier that Mario Carranza, a 4 friend of mine, the brother of Nicolas Carranza, we were 5 students at the University of El Salvador, state university, 6 and we had very broad communication, and we used to talk about 7 the degree, the military rank, the type of military man that 8 Mr. Colonel Carranza was, that he was very respected. The 9 military were persons with a great capacity for directing the 10 institutions, and in this case, holding a very important 11 position in El Salvador that made me understand when I was 12 Mario's classmate attending the university that his brother, 13 his brother, Nicolas Carranza, was a person of great 14 reputation; however, I, myself, was able to corroborate this 15 as I was already of sufficient age, I was 23 or 24, 16 approximately, to get to know who was directing our country 17 and to establish who were the persons who were guiding the 18 armed forces, and then I can say that Mr. Carranza or Colonel 19 Carranza is a person with great respect, with great 20 responsibility and who was able to manage that institution 21 from his second level as an undersecretary with great 22 responsibility. 23 THE COURT: This will be our last response 24 before lunch. 25 A. In the City of Sandiago de Maria in the department of CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1323 1 Usulutan from which Mr. Carranza is originally from, it was a 2 joy, it was a great joy because there was an outstanding 3 person who had come from that city and he had attained an 4 important grant within the armed force, and there was trust, 5 there was a great deal of trust in him, because everybody 6 loved him and still love him. So this proves that the degree, 7 the military rank that Colonel Carranza got, that his behavior 8 and military conduct also helped him attain this second rank, 9 this second position, second in command of the defense 10 ministry. This I was also able to corroborate because we were 11 able to talk to the brothers, we were able to establish 12 through the media that indeed a person with great category, 13 with great respect -- please, excuse me, with great respect 14 and with a great deal of dignity had been selected. 15 THE COURT: We're going to take our lunch break 16 at this time. Lunch should be ready for you, and we will 17 resume at 2:00 promptly. We will see you at that time. 18 THE CLERK: All rise. This honorable court 19 stands in recess until 2:00 o'clock. 20 (Recess taken at 12:30 until 2:00 p.m.) 21 (Jury in at 2:00 p.m.) 22 THE COURT: All right. You may be seated. 23 Counsel may proceed. 24 MR. ESQUIVEL: Thank you, Your Honor. 25 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1324 1 Q. Mr. Araujo, you have been friends with Colonel 2 Carranza's brother, Mario, is that right? 3 A. It's correct. 4 Q. You and Colonel Carranza's brother went to grade school 5 together? 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. And you and Colonel Carranza's brother studied together 8 at the University of El Salvador? 9 A. That's correct. 10 Q. You ate meals in the Carranza household? 11 A. No. 12 Q. You did not eat meals with Colonel Carranza's brother, 13 Mario, and his family? 14 A. Well, we only played together in the street, you know, 15 but we didn't share meals, because each one of us would go to 16 each one of our houses to have their meals, and we wouldn't go 17 over to share meals, neither me to his house or he to mine. 18 Q. Mr. Araujo, do you recall giving a deposition in this 19 case? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Do you remember you and I were there in Mr. Fargarson's 22 office about three months ago? 23 A. Yes, yes. 24 Q. And there was a court reporter there who was taking 25 down everything we said, do you remember that? CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1325 1 A. I recall. 2 Q. Do you recall that you raised your hand and took an 3 oath to tell the truth during that deposition? 4 A. Yes. 5 MR. ESQUIVEL: Your Honor, may I approach the 6 witness? 7 THE COURT: You may. 8 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 9 Q. Mr. Araujo, I have handed you a transcript of your 10 deposition testimony from August 12, 2005. Would you please 11 look at page 45, line 14? I'm sorry, if you look at line 11 12 on page 45, please. 13 A. Page 45, counsel? 14 Q. Yes, sir. 15 A. But it's in English. 16 Q. Yes. Well, the interpreter will interpret it for you. 17 Did I ask the following questions and you give the following 18 answers in your deposition: 19 Question: So are these half brothers or stepbrothers 20 of Colonel Carranza? 21 Answer: Half brothers. 22 Question: I see, okay. Did you ever eat at their 23 house? 24 Answer: Yes. 25 Mr. Araujo, I notice you have some papers in front of CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1326 1 you that you brought with you to court, what are those papers? 2 A. These are documents -- these are not documents, these 3 are reports that I have used to illustrate myself to be able 4 to provide information for this entire public viewing that was 5 going to be performed, and I have used them to make certain 6 notes to each one of my calendars to have greater knowledge of 7 this public viewing. I did not recall this issue of three 8 months ago whether we had agreed to have lunch or to eat 9 something at Mario's house, I could not recall. 10 Q. Mr. Araujo, who prepared the documents that you have in 11 front of you at the witness stand? 12 A. Well, these documents that I have here in existence, I 13 have the military code, the ordinance of the army, the 14 statement in Spanish that we gave on the 12th of August which 15 was provided to me -- a copy in English was provided to me, 16 and this one I have here was prepared by some friends of mine. 17 That translation that came into my hands in English was 18 translated into Spanish. I have other information here, these 19 charts that I presented, these are samples of the preparation 20 of the organic law. They are reduced copies of materials 21 always concerning the organic laws so that I can have this 22 material to help me in order to be able to respond to the 23 questions that have been posed here. Likewise, these 24 materials over here, these pamphlets, this includes the 25 statement from August the 12th, 2005, these -- the very same CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1327 1 document that you have turned over to me in English just a 2 moment ago. And other documents -- not documents, other 3 information that I had in my home and in my library concerning 4 the guaranties for judicial processes and procedural 5 guaranties that are enforced in El Salvador. Once again, a 6 copy of the organic law and information which was issued by 7 the ministry of human rights in El Salvador from the general 8 assembly of the security council and there is a note here from 9 the general secretary, the Peace Accords that I had mentioned 10 back then on August the 12th, 2005. 11 Q. Other than the people who helped you translate the 12 deposition, did anyone else help you prepare those materials? 13 A. Oh, yes. 14 Q. Who were they? 15 A. When I was asked to study these materials, that was 16 Dr. Robert Escobar Garcia who, along with me, was part at the 17 Military University in El Salvador, he was vice-director of 18 the university at the time, and he's a good friend to Colonel 19 Carranza, and he stated to me as an attorney -- as a trusted 20 attorney, he asked whether or not we could, excuse me, perform 21 an analysis of one of these documentations and all of these 22 pamphlets with the purpose of having an estimation of the 23 entire history of what has taken place and also perform the 24 analysis of this portion of the organic law. So having all of 25 this information that in the -- that you found in the file CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1328 1 that you just borrowed to me, loaned to me, he asked me if I 2 could assist him with the cause, and the cause -- by the 3 cause, he means to do a favor, and so we had an extensive 4 conversation about -- with Dr. Roberto Garcia concerning this 5 case for the purpose of being present here, and I'm told him, 6 listen, I have some difficulties, they are not considerable 7 difficulties, but I have to be -- I have to pay attention to 8 my cases in El Salvador, I have to be present for them, but 9 nevertheless, considering that this is about Mr. Carranza, of 10 whom I had already had knowledge, I already knew who he was, 11 how he acted, and also with my knowledge of his brothers, I 12 said, all right, let's get some more information about the 13 case and thus be able to start helping him. 14 Q. Now, Mr. Araujo, when Colonel Carranza was the 15 vice-minister of defense in 1980, you were 18 years old, is 16 that correct? 17 A. I want to think it over. 18 Q. Please take your time. 19 A. 17 years old, 17 -- 17, 18 years old, approximately. 20 Q. You've never been a member of the Salvadoran military, 21 have you, sir? 22 A. No. 23 Q. You've never written a book on Salvadoran military law? 24 A. No. 25 Q. And you have never written an article on Salvadoran CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1329 1 military law? 2 A. No. 3 Q. And you have never written a book on Salvadoran 4 military structure, is that right? 5 A. No. 6 Q. And you have never written an article on Salvadoran 7 military structure, have you, sir? 8 A. No. 9 Q. In 1998, you received your degree from the Military 10 University of El Salvador, is that correct? 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. And the next year, you were a professor at that 13 institution? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. And the next year, you became administrator at that 16 institution? 17 A. I don't remember. I don't remember the date exactly 18 the date, but I did hold the position of the administrator of 19 university, I don't remember the date. 20 Q. That university is no longer in existence, is it, sir? 21 A. No, it does not exist. 22 Q. And on October the 11th, 1999, is it true that the 23 ministry of education in El Salvador issued a resolution to 24 close down that university? 25 A. What year did you say? CROSS - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1330 1 Q. The year 1999. 2 A. Oh, yes. Yes, I believe so. 3 Q. And did the ministry of education cite as a reason to 4 close that university irregularities in the graduation and the 5 academic registration process for students? 6 A. One case of one student. 7 Q. And was that finding upheld by the constitutional 8 chamber of the Supreme Court of El Salvador in a decision in 9 November of 2002? 10 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter requests 11 counsel to please repeat the question. 12 BY MR. ESQUIVEL: 13 Q. Was the decision of the ministry of education upheld by 14 the Supreme Court of El Salvador in November of 2002? 15 A. The ruling was upheld. 16 MR. ESQUIVEL: Thank you. I have no further 17 questions, Your Honor. 18 THE COURT: Redirect? 19 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 20 BY MR. BROOKE: 21 Q. Sir, have you ever been accused of being a teacher of 22 math? 23 A. I've never taught mathematics. 24 Q. In your relationship with Mario Carranza, is he a half 25 brother of Mr. Carranza -- Colonel Carranza? REDIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1331 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Which house was it that you ate a meal at? 3 A. At the house of Mario Carranza where his parents were, 4 his father was, Dano De Hoy Carranza, Reynaldo was also there, 5 at their house in the La Parroquia neighborhood in the 6 Department of Usulutan. 7 Q. Has your relationship, friendship with Mr. Carranza's 8 half brothers and his father influenced you to not tell the 9 truth? 10 A. At no time has this affected me, and as to telling the 11 truth, the truth must be told because this is the truth. 12 Q. In El Salvador as a lawyer, do you take an oath to be 13 an officer of the courts for him whom you appear? 14 A. Please, repeat it. 15 Q. As a lawyer in El Salvador, do you have a 16 responsibility to be an officer of the court and tell the 17 truth? 18 A. That is so. 19 Q. The name of Dr. Escobar Garcia who was the chancellor 20 or president of the university at which you taught, is he the 21 same Garcia who was the minister of defense? 22 A. No. 23 Q. I would request that you look at Article 26 of the 24 organic law. 25 A. Okay. REDIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1332 1 Q. In subsection one, the first two words to provide, can 2 you tell the jury what that means? 3 A. To inform. 4 Q. In subsection two, the first two words, the words to 5 coordinate, can you tell the jury what those first two words 6 mean? 7 A. To coordinate is an administrative portion or part of 8 the entire area of the armed force. It is an administrative 9 part which is executed upon the entirety of the personnel from 10 the higher ranks towards the levels of the lower ranks, that 11 is coordinate, to administrate, coordinate. 12 Q. And subsection three, the first two words, to propose, 13 can you tell the jury what that means, sir? 14 A. To propose is to recommend, to suggest, and that is 15 what the vice-minister or deputy secretary of defense did in 16 accordance with Article 26. 17 THE INTERPRETER: Also, the interpreter will 18 advise the court at this point the witness has read a 19 document that he has before them, and the interpreter 20 would like to know if the court would have the interpreter 21 translate that portion into the record. 22 THE COURT: Yes, that would be preferable. 23 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter will proceed 24 at this point. The witness read from the document and 25 said: REDIRECT - JOSE ANTONIO ARAUJO 1333 1 A. The undersecretary of defense who, in repetition, would 2 respond for the coordination of the technical function of the 3 general staff and of all of the institutions shall avoid 4 jurisdictional and competency conflicts supervising each 5 branch and the entire institution which will place his 6 capacity in the compliance of the plans and orders of the 7 general staff for the benefit of the mission. 8 THE INTERPRETER: And the interpreter will now 9 give you the rest of the response. 10 A. This is to suggest, not to order, to suggest that this 11 should be done. He would give suggestions. 12 BY MR. BROOKE: 13 Q. Sir, in Article 26 defining the responsibility of the 14 undersecretary of defense, is there any language that has the 15 subsecretary is to order or to issue orders? 16 A. According to the explanations that I have been able to 17 contribute to the jury, it says -- it doesn't say order, it 18 says suggests, advises, proposes. 19 MR. BROOKE: Thank you very much, sir. 20 THE COURT: Well, thank you. And we will let 21 you step down. Thank you very much. 22 (Witness excused.) 23 THE COURT: Mr. Fargarson or Mr. Brooke, who 24 will our next witness be? 25 MR. BROOKE: Mr. Talavera. If I may call him. 1334 1 THE COURT: Absolutely. 2 THE CLERK: Sir, if you will raise your right 3 hand to be sworn. Do you solemnly swear that the 4 testimony you are about to give the court and jury in this 5 matter to be the truth, the whole truth and following but 6 the truth, so help you God? 7 THE WITNESS: Yes. 8 THE CLERK: You may take the witness stand. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DIRECT - JULIO ROMERO 1335 1 (Miguel Angel Urrutia previously sworn to 2 interpret English into Spanish and Spanish into English.) 3 JULIO ROMERO, 4 was thereupon called as a witness on behalf of the 5 Defendant, and having been first duly sworn, was 6 examined and testified as follows: 7 DIRECT EXAMINATION 8 BY MR. BROOKE: 9 Q. Good afternoon, sir. 10 A. Good afternoon. 11 Q. Would you please state your full name for the court and 12 jury? 13 A. My name is Julio Romero. 14 Q. And where do you live? 15 A. In Costa Rica. 16 Q. And what is your age? 17 A. Fifty-six. 18 Q. In the 1970s, were you a commercial pilot in Latin 19 America? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. As well