Angry White Kid

Update on Oct. 2 political prisoners in Oaxaca

October 16, 2009
[Spanish original]
Translated by Scott Campbell

On the morning of October 11, 2009, after more than a week of remaining kidnapped by the system of injustice which reigns in our state, 10 of our 13 comrades who were arrested on October 2 gained their conditional freedom after a process plagued with irregularities and violations of their individual rights, but with the latent risk that if new elements are gathered they may again be subject to arrest, for which we ask all to be alert of any attempt to deprive them of their freedom.

We continue demanding the absolute freedom of the three comrades who remain kidnapped in the Santa María Ixcotel prison, who are: SOLEDAD GUZMAN RUIZ, GABRIEL MIJANGOS MARTINEZ, and BERNARDO RAFAEL VASQUEZ REYES, as well as demanding their physical well-being inside of the prison as the entire time they have been inside they have been threatened and attacked.

We believe that the repression unleashed on the second of October and the days afterwards is part of a state strategy against the organized people, especially against the youth, who, for thinking, dressing and feeling differently are targets of all the police brutality, proof of which occurred on October 5, when the march demanding the freedom of the October 2 political prisoners made its way from Prepa 2 to the zócalo, two of our young comrades who were leading it were detained.  And Wednesday, October 7, the day a rally was held outside of the Ixcotel prison, a surveillance operation was deployed which consisted of patrol cars at the intersections around the prison where the police checked out who was going to the prison to attend the rally.  With this we confirm that we are living under a state of siege equal to that of 2006. For this reason we repudiate the ruling of the magistrates of the National Supreme Court of Injustice who have made themselves complicit with the true criminals and murderers (Vicente Fox, Enrique Peña Nieto, Ulises Ruiz, Franco Vargas, etc.). We demand a resolution that conforms to the law - just, ethical and honest.

We again show our respect for the freedom of expression to all those journalists who carry out their work ethically and professionally.  We repudiate the infiltration of pseudo-journalists who serve the government in order to attack the social movement.

We are in solidarity with the MEXICAN UNION OF ELECTRICIANS in their just struggle for workers’ rights and against the privatization policies of Felipe Calderón.

WE DEMAND:

1. THE ABSOLUTE FREEDOM OF GABRIEL MIJANGOS MARTNEZ, SOLEDAD GUZMAN RUIZ, BERNARDO RAFAEOL VASQUEZ REYES.
2. THE DROPPING OF THE CHARGES AGAINST THE TEN FREED PRISONERS.
3. AN END TO THE HARASSMENT OF THE SOCIAL MOVEMENT AND THE LIBERTARIAN YOUTH OF OAXACA.
4. THE INTERVENTION OF SECTION 22 AS THESE YOUTH ARE A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THE PEOPLE WHO MOBILIZED WHEN THE TEACHERS ASKED THEM TO IN 2006.
5. WE DEMAND THAT THE SENSATIONALIST PRESS CARRY OUT THEIR WORK ETHICALLY AND HONESTLY.

WE’RE NOT ALL HERE, WE’RE MISSING THE PRISONERS
FREEDOM FOR ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS

CASOTA's One Year Anniversary

Our baby is all grown up. I wrote about CASOTA a couple times before [1, 2]. It's an autonomous space in the center of the city of Oaxaca that I, along with several others, helped get off the ground last year. This weekend it's celebrating it's one year anniversary. If you're ever down there, go check it out.  You can read more about CASOTA at its website.

Statement from the October 2 prisoners in Oaxaca

Versión en español después del link.

October 2, 2009, marked 41 years since the Tlateloco Massacre of hundreds of students by the Mexican army.  The massacre and the demand for justice are marked by marches all over Mexico every October 2.  They also incorporate demands around poverty, corruption, political prisoners and more.  Two of the three October 2 marches held in Oaxaca earlier this month were attacked by the police with at least 18 young people arrested.  They remain detained.  Below is a statement they released last week.  As well, the anarchist contingent of the Oct. 2 march in Mexico City was met with severe police brutality and arrests.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

To the brave and conscious people:
To the democratic and combative teachers:
To the independent media:
To the Other Campaign:

Dear comrades, today we ask for your solidarity because we are a part of the social movement in Oaxaca, we are participants in the barricades, in the mega-marches, and in other forms of protest against the government. We are youth with the goal of completely changing this system and because of that we feel driven to continue fighting for the freedom that the brave people have instilled in us, that the people have seen arise in the majority of us, the prisoners from October 2, 2009.

We are active members of the movement where we join in and scream the slogans of freedom for political prisoners, for respect for the indigenous peoples and in defense of the earth which is as sacred and dignified as our lives which we have been building little by little, constantly struggling through the day, giving us strength to pick up a piece of paper and a pen which, like our lives, is so important because our paper is our life and the pen is what we do every day to work as always for a bit of bread and water, if we are able to get that much which is so necessary.  Yet for the members of congress it is not so important, or for all of those who spend more than 2,000 pesos for food or those who want to increase their pay by more than 150%, which continues to increase the poverty in our Mexico with a hidden tax, saying that it is up to the poor to defend ourselves from the corrupt ravages of the major political, financial and economic (IMF, WB, IB) interests.

Because of this and more, comrades, we have decided to continue to support all those who need us and who we are able to help, even if it costs us our freedom.  Because of this, comrades, we reiterate that now, by chance of fate, we need your support, whether it is communal, verbal, moral, economic, emotional.  Whatever happens we will continue to resist because there is no other option for us, just like you who are on the other side of the bars, who in spite of having the word “freedom” in your mouths, on your lips, in your hearts, the reality is different.  We are prisoners because every day that we breathe we have to risk our lives for a piece of bread which isn’t nearly enough.  Every day it is more difficult to find that which we call food. 

Because of this, comrades, we need your legal support in order to fight for our freedom, as none of us on our side have stopped fighting.  Not only physically, but mentally we’ve had to be in solidarity together as the government, with the charges against us, wants to separate us and all of us who fight for a better world have to be strong.  We are asking for the help of Section 22’s legal department, so that they may join up with the comrades who are monitoring our cases so that together they can mediate a solution and obtain our freedom which we lost last October 2 while we were remembering our comrades, who like us fought for a just cause, and lost their lives.

Because of this we ask for your immediate, kind and valuable intervention in our cases so that shortly we will again be in the streets enjoying the freedom that they so unjustly robbed us of.  We know we’ve always struggled together, shoulder to shoulder.  One of those struggles we’ve been through was the change in [the leadership of the teachers’ union] Section 22, the other was the second state congress of the APPO from which emanated many agreements, one of which was the immediate and unconditional freedom for all political prisoners of poverty and from the social movement in this country.  We will continue advancing shoulder to shoulder, elbow to elbow. As well we need to understand and accept our mistakes.  We should learn from them in order to continue moving forward, even though we may have to lose more comrades, perhaps kidnapped by the state or like the case in San Pedro Jicaya where we lost two comrades.  And despite this we have not stopped fighting, just as we haven’t stopped fighting for the others who have died.  Also we should keep fighting against the supposed Alliance for Quality Education (ACE) which is nothing more than the privatization of education.  Because of this and because of so much more we must keep fighting.

A combative greeting from the comrades who are prisoners and as Mercedes Sosa said, “For the caged bird, for the fish in the tank, for my friend who is a prisoner because (s)he said what (s)he thought, I call you FREEDOM.”

FRATERNALLY,
POLITICAL PRISONERS FROM OCTOBER 2 LOCKED IN THE IXCOTEL JAIL

FREE POLITICAL PRISONERS

Cesareo Capriles’ legacy Part IV: To die free of pageantry

PART I
PART II
PART III

February 22, 2009
By Wilson García Mérida
[Spanish original]
Translated by Scott Campbell

He hated the Chaco war because it destroyed the climate of peace that the continuity of “Arte y Trabajo” required.  He tenaciously opposed the conflagration, leading a peaceful march on the 14th of September Plaza and was jailed for the crime of “treason to the homeland.”

After the war he dedicated himself to commerce and became associates with Alfredo Galindo Quiroga in order to open the “Cosmos” pharmacy, to the west of the Principal Plaza.  The revolutionary process that would culminate in 1952 with a particracy predestined to impose a culture of corruption in Bolivia scattered his “Arte y Trabajo” collaborators into various parties that destroyed their libertarian ideals (MNR, FSB, PIR, POR), and extinguished their passion for history.  An illness in his eyes condemned him to sightlessness, leading him to the decision to take his own life.

He was 70 years old when he did it, on July 4, 1950.  “He told me that he was going on a trip and he wished me luck, that he was satisfied he had me as one of his best friends,” recalls Efraín Vega, owner of a farm in Tablas Monte, Chapare, where he knew Capriles went to end his life, free of all funeral pageantry.

“He was terrified of funerals; he would see a burial and get out of there.  He said: ‘That is life’s ultimate farce.’ He was critical of the ostentation and spectacle that, according to him, made the fact of being buried repulsive,” said Don Efraín, when recalling that some days before his suicide, Capriles wanted to find out in what part of Tablas Monte Vega’s lands were.  “I asked him why he wanted to know and he told me that he wanted to go to ‘fertilize’ my lands.”  Don Cesáreo gave himself a double dose of morphine in the inhospitable forest of Tablas Monte, a lethal injection he obtained from his own Cosmos pharmacy.  No one saw him again.

Don Nivardo Paz Arze, an innate defender of Cesáreo Capriles, showed us the gold brooch with which the great anarchist ended his fascinating existence: “From Alfredo Galindo, his business partner in the pharmacy, I knew that he left a payment and receipt for the double dose of morphine that he took for this one-way trip.”  Even in his last days, his integrity and honesty was ironclad.

He left a complete collection of “Arte y Trabajo” with his friend Werner Guttentag, writing on the cover these words which gave flavor to his departure: “In the face of humanity’s stupidity, even the gods are impotent.”

Such was the example of the life and death of an authentic libertarian Cochabamban.

Wilson García Mérida is an independent journalist in Cochabamba, Bolivia, Director of the Servicio Informativo Datos & Analisis. His email is llactacracia@yahoo.com.

Conversations with Sandino

Below is my most ambitious translating effort to date, a lengthy interview with guerilla leader Augusto Sandino.  I believe a bit of background would be helpful.

These series of interviews took place in February of 1933, one year before Sandino was assassinated by General Anastasio Somoza on February 21, 1934, and one month after the inauguration of Juan Bautista Sacasa as president of Nicaragua and the accompanying departure of the U.S. Marines from the country.

The interviewer is Ramón de Belausteguigoitia (aka Ramón Belausteguigoitia Landaluce).  He was a Basque nationalist, publisher and writer.  Relevant towards the end of the interview is that Spain had recently become a Republic in 1931, the right was nine months away from winning a plurality in the November 1933 elections and the Spanish Civil War was only three years away.

Given the length, I've also put it into PDF form [download].  Be aware that given the age and formality used, the phrasing is a bit dense, and some of the ideas are outlandish and problematic, but I hope that people find it useful or at least interesting.

------------------

Conversations with Sandino
By Ramón de Belausteguigoitia
February 1933
[Spanish original]
Translated by Scott Campbell

Index:

1. The man and his ideas
2. Social issues
3. Spanish America, Central America and Spain

1. The man and his ideas

During the approximately two weeks that I was in the Army of Freedom camp, I didn’t cease to be in daily conversation with General Sandino, who from the first moment treated me with an altogether familial kindness.

Sometimes the chief would call for me and other times I went to his house, watched over by his personal guard with machineguns in hand.  I usually awaited the general in a dark room next to that of the guards and he came in smiling, hugging me, as was his custom.

It was a simple room decorated with a calendar and a picture card which showed seal hunters in a tempestuous sea of ice shooting at those mammals that were alarmingly encircling the boat.  There was a bench and some chairs; normally on the bench sat some leaders who attended the interview in silence or soldiers from the camp.  In the corner one could see a pile of rifles.

The general sat in a simple rocking chair, which he rocked unceasingly.  It gives his oval yet angular face a certain kind of asymmetry that works, together with the commissure of his lips, to create strange variations in his face.  Frequently his eyes shine with a tender friendliness, but ordinarily they show profound depth; intense reflection.  His relaxed facial features, the strength of his jaw, open at an angle, confirm the impression that his messages are of a serene and affirming purpose.  His voice is smooth, convincing; no doubts in his concepts, and the words are precise, well-guided by an intellect that has thought through the matters it expresses.  It is his habit to rub his hands while holding a handkerchief.  Rarely does he change the serene tone of his voice. The impression that General Sandino gives, in both his appearance and in his speech, is of a great spiritual state.  He is, without a doubt, a practitioner of yoga, a pupil of the Orient. 

The topics of our conversation were varied and normally without much structure.  I have tried to frame them under distinct subjects, but naturally without any absolute defining of the concepts and phrases, so that the reader can penetrate the psychology of this extraordinary champion of freedom, who has been portrayed by many as a vulgar and ignorant man, something like the Pancho Villa of the Nicaraguan rebellion.  But this is absolutely false. General Sandino is a delicate and fine spirit, a man of action and a visionary, as we have already said, and even having had very limited schooling, he is an extraordinary person, apart from his role as liberator.

Acteal: Statement from Las Abejas Community on the release of paramilitaries

August 9, 2009
[Spanish original]
Translated by Scott Campbell

Las Abejas [The Bees] Civil Society Organization
Sacred Land of the Acteal Martyrs, Chiapas, Mexico

To the Inter-American Human Rights Commission
To all Social and Political Organizations
To all Human Rights defenders
To all the people of Mexico and the World
To the National and International press
To the Other Campaign
To public opinion

In response to reports that have been spread by some media outlets that the Supreme Court is about to make a ruling that would allow the freedom of 40 of the paramilitaries responsible for the massacre in Acteal on December 22, 1997, we want to state the following:

We are the members of Las Abejas Civil Society, from the San Pedro Chenalhó municipality, Chiapas, and based in the Sacred Land of Acteal in the same municipality.

Our organization formed in 1992 to confront the repression that then-governor of Chiapas, Patrocinio González Garrido, launched against indigenous communities, among them our own community of Chenalhó that saw several of their founding members, among them the current President of the Board of Directors of Las Abejas, unjustly imprisoned for crimes they didn’t commit.

Since our founding we have been dedicated to the defense of indigenous rights and to searching for a society where peace and justice reign.  We have always said that our struggle would be peaceful and we have practiced that.

When the EZLN uprising occurred on January 1, 1994, we saw what their demands were and took note that they were the same as ours.  As a result we decided to support their demands but we did not accept taking up arms and maintained our non-violent stance.  We joined forces with national and international civil society to demand that the Mexican government stop its war against our indigenous brothers and sisters.  We participated in the peace lines when the first talks took place between the Zapatistas and the government and later we participated with our delegates in the San Andrés Dialogues.

Later we discovered that in reality the government did not want a dialogue and while it spoke of peace, with its actions it promoted war through paramilitary groups.

In 1997, armed paramilitary groups appeared in Chenalhó. Through force they demanded that all the communities help them buy weapons and attack the Zapatistas.  If we didn’t accept taking up arms against the government would we possibly accept taking them up against our own indigenous brothers and sisters?  We refused to support the armed paramilitary groups that we saw clearly had the support of the government to get weapons, to be trained and to take violent actions.  We were loyal to our principles in spite of the threats and when we refused to support them, the paramilitaries kidnapped us, ran us out of our communities, robbed our harvests, took our belongings and burned our houses.  Because of this we became displaced, but we remained loyal to our principles of peace and non-violence.

It was while we were displaced that the paramilitary attacked on December 22, 1997 and the Acteal Massacre occurred, where 45 of our brothers and sisters died while praying and fasting for peace.

After the massacre of our brothers and sisters we kept our peaceful stance.  We refused to seek vengeance.  We continued to reject weapons.  We decided to seek justice through peaceful and legal means with the help of the Fray Bartolomé Human Rights Center, whose president is our bishop, Father Samuel. 

With the support of national and international civil society we pressured the government to punish those responsible for the massacre of our brothers and sisters.  The first arrests of a group of material authors occurred the same day we laid our loved ones to rest before the eyes of thousands of witnesses.  As a provocation, the murderers passed by the survivors in a truck belonging to the municipal president of Chenalhó, when the blood of the martyrs was still fresh.  Now the prisoners’ defense lawyers say that these paramilitaries should remain free because when we got the authorities to detain them there wasn’t an arrest warrant.  And such are their arguments to free them.

We got around 80 of the material authors of the massacre detained, along with the municipal president of Chenalhó who was one of their leaders.  But we weren’t able to get the intellectual authors either detained or investigated, as it wasn’t just the municipal authorities who supported the paramilitaries.  It was also the state and federal authorities.  We say that because we have seen it with our eyes and we know that it is true and as such we declare it.  Since then we have tirelessly publicly declared that there is not justice in the Acteal case and impunity continues.

Today, five months from the twelfth anniversary of the murder of our brothers and sisters we were informed with great sadness and indignation that the government is going to free 40 of these paramilitaries through a Supreme Court of Justice decree, that more appropriately should be called the Supreme Court of Injustice.  Faced with this news we declare the following:

1) It’s not true, as many media outlets are saying, that the Supreme Court decree is a step towards achieving justice for Acteal.  Rather it’s a step back from the little that has been achieved.  It’s a step forward for impunity.

2) They are saying that the PGR [Federal Attorney General’s Office] fabricated evidence against the prisoners and that what the Supreme Court is doing is just because there is no true evidence of the paramilitaries’ guilt.  This is not true either.  There is and there has always been real evidence which is our testimony of who we saw do the killing and we know the paramilitaries.  But the government (the Attorney General and the judges) has weakened our evidence.  They created holes in the case so that when this moment arrived the paramilitaries would be able to get out through these holes with the help of their lawyers and Supreme Court judges.  It’s the same thing they do so that the narcos go free.  The Supreme Court is not correcting the work of the PGR as they say.  It is completing the work they started so that the accomplices of the government can remain free.

3) They say that we haven’t presented proof of the guilt of the paramilitaries.  This is not true either.  We’ve presented proof not once but many times.  And 11 years after the murders in Acteal they continue calling on us to present our statements, because they tell the judge or the public ministry that something is missing from the previous time.  To the lawyers from CIDE we say that their clients are not the only victims of corruption in the justice system.  They have had those witnesses who saw their loved ones die repeat time and again the terrible story with all the pain it causes their hearts.  And in the end they say: “we need you to tell us again because the judge ordered a renewal of the proceedings.”  We know that this is called “psychological torture.”

4) The communities of Chenalhó are ill at ease because for days rumors have been circulating that when their friends get out the paramilitaries who have been free this whole time are going to get those who sent their friends to jail.  We hold the Supreme Court and all their accomplices, from Mr. Aguilar Camín, the CIDE lawyers and the government of Felipe Calderón responsible if the return of these 40 paramilitaries brings violence back to our municipality.  We hold them responsible for the lives of the witnesses and any criminal act that these paramilitaries who they say are innocent commit.

5) We call on the country’s highest authorities to reflect on what they are doing.  If organizations such as Las Abejas Civil Society, who reject violence as a means to defend our rights, tell them that the justice system and state institutions are completely on the side of the government accomplices, then, what path does that leave us?  What hope do the Mexican people have?  The government says that it is against violence but daily we see how it is the first to promote it.

6) In spite of this, we, the members of Las Abejas Civil Society declare that we are not going to take down our flag of peace and justice.  We are going to continue fighting in a non-violent way.  But we don’t have any faith in the government. Our faith is in the solidarity of civil society, in the blood of our martyrs which gives us strength to not abandon the struggle and in our god who is not deaf to the clamor of the poor and oppressed.

Yours faithfully,

The Voice of Las Abejas Civil Society
For the Board of Directors:
Sebastián Pérez Vázquez, President
Pedro Jiménez Arias, Vice President
Francisco Gómez Pérez, Treasurer
Francisco Pérez Gómez, Deputy Treasurer

Mexico's fake RCMP report backfires

8/9 UPDATE: On Thursday, Mexico's National Human Rights Commission joined the chorus condemning the not-RCMP report, saying it "is not based on expertise, it's based on opinion." Still no response from the report's authors. Also, a reader pointed out that my nod to Amnesty International was more praiseworthy than merited. While Amnesty's statement urging that Plan Mexico funds be withheld is welcome, overall the organization has taken a disgraceful stance on Plan Mexico.  As Kristin Bricker reports, after Plan Mexico passed, it praised the initiative, calling it "appropriate and timely" and supporting the fact that only a paltry 15% of funds were conditions upon respect for human rights.

------------

It's been a busy and interesting week regarding developments in Oaxaca, Mexico, and the U.S.

First, there was the report in the Mexican media on July 29 that an investigation by officials from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police into the murder of U.S. independent journalist Brad Will affirmed the conclusions drawn by the Mexican Federal Attorney General's Office (PGR) regarding his death.  The PGR, contrary to all available evidence, claims Will, shot in Oaxaca in 2006, was killed at close range by a anti-government protester.  The media reports raised more questions than they answered. For example, why was the RCMP investigating this, and why, as evident from the reports, did they carry out such a clearly laughable investigation?

These questions and more were answered when Brad Will's family released a statement soundly debunking the so-called RCMP report. As it turns out, there was no official RCMP investigation.  It was merely three retired RCMP officers who did an "investigation" which the Mexican government then presented to the media as an official RCMP report.  Today, Physicians for Human Rights - a group that actually did investigate Brad's murder - issued a press release that similarly called into question the veracity of the ex-RCMPers report.  James Stephen, Phil Ziegler and Gary Buerk certainly have some serious rebutting to do if they don't want to be tarnished as integrity-free hacks-for-hire.  Although I'm sure there's always a market for those types.

The conclusions of another "investigation" regarding Oaxaca were released yesterday by Mexico's Supreme Court. They took it upon themselves to investigate the actions of the state and federal governments who brutally repressed the 2006 uprising.  Unsurprisingly, the Supreme Court found the use of force - which left 27 dead and hundreds injured, arrested and tortured - to be legitimate.  This is the same court which found the murders and mass rapes by police that occurred in Atenco in 2006 to be unworthy of investigating either.

But one question remains - why all these reports stating how the Mexican state is not at fault for the atrocities of 2006 in Oaxaca?  The answer can be found in Plan Mexico, aka the Merida Initiative. The three-year, $1.4 billion aid (mostly military) package to Mexico and Central America has a human rights requirement for Mexico.  Yearly, the U.S. State Department must certify Mexico's respect for human rights and the Congress must approve that certification.  If that doesn't happen, then Mexico loses 15% of the Plan Mexico funds.  Of course, Mexico gets the other 85% no matter how many people it tortures and kills, but it could do it much more effectively if it got 100% of the funds.

Also, later this month both Clinton and Obama are to visit Mexico to see how the U.S.'s hegemonic efforts under the tutelage of Felipe Calderon are holding up.  The family of Juan Manuel Martinez Moreno - the Oaxacan social activist being framed by Mexico for the murder of Brad Will - is requesting an audience with Obama in Mexico City.  The Mexican government would of course rather avoid this and any other scrutiny of its human rights record, while at the same time receiving all the Plan Mexico funds.  So the timing of the non-RCMP and Supreme Court reports saying that everything is fine in Oaxaca is no surprise.

However, it appears that their efforts have all been for naught. For while Clinton's State Dept. dutifully certified Mexico's human rights record this week, even though human rights complaints have risen 600% under Calderon's regime, Senator Leahy yesteday blocked the certification from being voted upon in the Senate, basically saying he doesn't believe the State Dept.  Maybe Amnesty International got to him.  This means that, at least for the time being, the Mexican government will only have 85% of the Plan Mexico funds at its disposal to deploy against the social movements demanding justice and an end to impunity.  Which, given that Plan Mexico shouldn't exist at all, is still appallingly too much.

Letter to Obama from family of Juan Manuel Martinez, APPO member framed for Brad Will's murder

En español despues del link.

Oaxaca, Oax, Mexico
July 31, 2009           

TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, 
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Dear President Obama,

Maria Libia Martinez Moreno and the Martinez Tejada family wish, by means of this letter, to comunícate to you our concern regarding the homicide case of Bradley Roland Will.  We send this in the hope that our plea for help will reach you, by way of the U.S. Embassy.

On October 27, 2006 the journalist, Bradley Roland Will, a U.S. citizen from Evanston, Illinois, was filming for the news agency Indymedia, a march by the Oaxaca social movement, as it proceeded toward the municipality of Santa Lucia del Camino, just outside the city of Oaxaca.  During the demonstration violence broke out between some demonstrators and groups made up of public servants and sympathizers of the PRI party.  Bradley was injured by a firearm and subsequently died.

The first reports of the murder of Bradley indicated that the crime had been committed by Abel Zarate, a town councilor of the municipality of Santa Lucia del Camino, as well as by Oswaldo Manuel Aguilar Coello, a municipal police officer, both of whom had strong links with the PRI party, the party in power in the state of Oaxaca.

Because the investigation of the case had become notorious for its bias, the  Attorney General of the Republic took over the investigation.  In September 2008 the National Commission of Human Rights made a recommendation that the investigation be disqualified.

At the end of September 2008 JUAN MANUEL MARTINEZ MORENO was intercepted two blocks from his home by two persons who were never identified, who brusquely and violently accosted him, taking from him his identification cards and interrogating him with a series of questions about himself.  He cooperated with them calmly and gave them the personal information they demanded.  He related this to his family, and for several days we accompanied him, being worried that he might be kidnapped.  But to our surprise two weeks later, on October 16, 2008 he was detained and imprisoned as the person responsible for the homicide of Bradley Roland Will. 

Juan Manuel is not responsible for the crime he is accused of.  From the very time of his arbitrary detention, Juan Manuel’s human rights have been violated. According to investigators, those who first accosted Juan Manuel near his home were state intelligence and investigation agents, or so the PGR claims.  It is clear that this was a show put together by the responsible authorities.  In the following legal processes, all the personal information which Juan Manuel gave to his attackers on that day, such as his address, what he was doing at the time of his detention, the hours at which he leaves for and returns from work, which the men had asked him, were presented by the Federal Intelligence Agency as their own work, fruit of an exhaustive investigation through which they were able to detain Juan Manuel.  What work are they referring to, if the actual assassins remain free, and we do not know who is covering up for them or why?  But it is unjust that they have imprisoned an innocent person.  In the judicial process which followed there are many grave irregularities which make the case both unjust and illegal.

The recognition which Juan Manuel enjoys among his neighbors was made evident a short time ago when he was invited to work at the Education Commission, in the area of Sports, for the municipality of Santa Lucia.

Even the family of Brad Will themselves have also declared that Juan Manuel Martinez Moreno is not the one responsible for the death of their son.

We are concerned that the arbitrary arrest and the 4 arrest warrants of Juan Manuel, are only a justification and a condition to press for the funds to be released from the United States for the Plan Merida. 

WE URGENTLY REQUEST THE CONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS:

1. To scrutinize the course of the investigations that have been carried out in the legal documentation of the case.

2. To take into account the recommendations of the National Commission for Human Rights and the international Human Rights organizations on this matter.

3. To attend to the demands for justice and the assessments of the family of the journalist Bradley Roland Will.

4. To consider the human rights violations committed against the Mexican citizen Juan Manuel Martinez Moreno.

5. To make this a common cause which begs justice from both countries.

6. To consider our petition for an interview with THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ON AUGUST 10 in Mexico City:  the purpose being to give you a better understanding of the situation that we are living - the MARTINEZ MORENO FAMILY.

And so we hope that you will consider these concerns that we have presented, and we thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
MARIA LIBIA MARTINEZ MORENO Y  FAMILIA MARTINEZ TEJADA

Will Family Denounces the Continued Bias of PGR Investigation into Brad Will’s Death

En español despues del link.

PRESS RELEASE

August 3rd, 2009

Will Family Denounces the Continued Bias of PGR Investigation into Brad Will’s Death

The Will family today condemned the latest tactics of the Mexican prosecutor general’s office (PGR) in the investigation into the death of photojournalist Brad Will, who was shot while filming street protests in Oaxaca, Mexico in October, 2006.

With the leak last week of a report written by some retired Canadian police officers – a report commissioned by the PGR and presented in the Mexican press as an investigation carried out by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police  – the PGR continues its pattern of biased, unscientific and politically motivated investigative efforts of justifying a deeply flawed investigation into the true circumstances of Brad’s death. 

The PGR has continually refused to pursue the most likely scenario that off duty Oaxacan municipal authorities – who were filmed shooting guns into the protesting crowds numerous times during that day – were responsible for many of the deaths in Oaxaca, including Brad Will’s.  Instead, the PGR has chosen hearsay and fabricated evidence to help imprison an innocent man, Juan Manuel Martinez Moreno.  The Will family deplores the politicization of the Brad Will case.

Well respected human rights groups – Amnesty International, Physicians for Human Rights, Reporters Without Borders, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the National Commission on Human Rights in Mexico, and others – have all condemned the PGR’s investigation and its tactics. 

For example, the Physicians for Human Rights, has pointed out serious flaws in the PGR’s forensic examinations.  The Physicians for Human Rights experts examined the evidence in the case and issued a report in May of 2008 concluding amongst other things, that the bullet that struck Brad in the chest had ricocheted off of a red solid object.  A ricochet off an intermediate target supports the hypothesis of a longer range gunshot.  The most obvious conclusion would be that the bullet ricocheted off the red truck viewed by Brad’s videocamera in Brad’s final moments and struck him in the chest.  The red truck was located at a distance of approximately 35 meters.

As coadyuvante, with full rights under Mexican law to access the case file, the Will Family’s lawyer has been aware of the serious flaws in the PGR’s investigation.  For instance, the imprisoning of Juan Manuel Martinez Merino rests entirely on the submission of testimony by two hearsay witnesses who themselves even admitted to never seeing Brad get shot.

Significant sworn statements by witnesses have been suppressed, such as the person who crouched in front of Brad when he was shot.  The witness stated he heard and felt the bullet pass by his head before striking Brad.  In addition, the sworn statements of numerous photojournalists at the scene have been ignored.  The journalists stated it was impossible that anyone could have shot Brad at close range without their noticing it.

With last week’s leaks, the PGR also continues a pattern of providing the appearance of action in the investigation just before high level US government officials visit Mexico and Merida Initiative funding matters come before the US Congress. 

The Will Family continues to demand that a legitimate, unbiased investigation be performed with respect to not only Brad Will’s death but also the 20+ other unprosecuted deaths that occurred during the demonstrations in Oaxaca in 2006.  

The Will Family also calls for the immediate release of Juan Manuel Martinez Moreno.

Addendum:

We have attached as an Addendum a summary of the investigation’s flaws and our specific response to the Canadian “Independent” Report, which has been sent to both Attorney General Medina-Mora and to the Canadian investigators.

-------------

ADDENDUM

The PGR has never considered any other theory except that Brad was shot at close range by an APPO demonstrator. Our family's experience has been one of urging the Oaxaca State Attorney General and later the PGR to consider all possible theories.  We have been ignored at every step.  The fact that the Canadians d id not speak to our family or to our legal representative in Mexico only continues this trend of refusing to consider all possible theories.

Issues with the Canadian “Independent” Review

     In general, the Canadian report is incomplete and biased and lacks the quality expected from forensic experts.

Impartial?

The Canadian investigators are intervening as individuals; they do not have the backing of any institution.  This gives rise to doubt about their impartiality.  Who funded their report?  What are their credentials?

Reliance on Selective Information from PGR

The Canadian investigators do not speak or read Spanish which put them at a disadvantage.  They had to rely solely on translations from the PGR.  In various parts of the report, it appears that the objective is to support the findings of the PGR investigation and ignore other facts.

Prejudicial Political Language

     The study contains usage of political language in statements that reach beyond their position as experts, such as when they refer to the APPO and Brad's participation in the conflict.

No Study of Other Expert Investigations

Why didn't the Canadian investigators contact the Physicians for Human Rights to review and discuss their independent, scientifically-based findings? 

Why didn't the Canadian investigators contact National Commission on Human Rights (NCHR) in Mexico to review and discuss their findings?  NCHR had access to a high quality copy of Brad's tape.  As a result, their analysis of the tape and sound on the tape would be more accurate than an analysis of an internet version of the tape.

Position of Camera

     Canadian investigators allege that they have seen several photographs with Brad filming with his left shoulder forward.  We dispute this. We have seen many photos and film strips of Brad filming with his camera, both in Oaxaca and elsewhere.  He videotaped with his camera straight ahead with both shoulders squared.

Conclusions Would Place Shooter Exactly Where Two Photojournalists Were

   Canadian investigators believe the shooter was to Brad's right about 10 meters away, per their diagram. This is absurd. There were two photojournalists crouching in this location.  These photojournalists would have to be deaf and blind not to have observed someone in their midst shooting at Brad.

 To conclude, the Canadian investigators write: "We feel that the investigation was conducted in an unbiased manner with an open mind to all possible theories."  This is absurd. 

Bias in PGR Reports and Actions

PGR Bias Evident in Background Information Presented by Canadians

     Background information is presented in a prejudicial manner and contains numerous errors of fact.  We are shocked, disturbed and offended that the PGR has presented our son in such a derogatory and inaccurate manner.

a.)  Brad was an independent journalist working for Indymedia.

b.)  Brad did not work with guerilla groups in Central America.  He was never in Central America.

c.)  Not only did Journalist Al Giordano not introduce Brad to people in Oaxaca, he advised Brad not to come to Oaxaca.  Giordano himself never traveled to Oaxaca during the conflict.

d.)  Brad never lived in the Navarro home.  He lived with three other non-Mexicans the whole time he was in Oaxaca.

e.)  Brad received his press credentials from Indymedia, as well as from the Oaxaca teachers union, Section 22.  Every reporter covering the conflict on a day-to-day basis received the same section 22 press credentials.

f.)  Brad was not involved in any of the demonstrations.  Brad did gain the confidence of many of the APPO and CIPO members because he was not one of the journalists or photojournalists that covered the events for a short time (a day or two) and then left.  He was there as a photojournalist attempting to document the events as they unfolded.

PGR Bias Against APPO

The teachers protesting the governor did so in the context of an annual teachers’ union strike. The name of the Oaxaca local of the national union is known in Mexico as Section 22.  At the beginning of the conflict the APPO did not exist.  The APPO was created as an umbrella organizational structure to coordinate civilian protests after the governor' s failed pre-dawn raid on the teachers' protest camp on June 14, 2006.  The APPO was created by the overwhelming local citizen rejection of the governor's use of violence and their support for the teachers’ non-violent strike.  The complete mischaracterization of the APPO betrays a bias against that organization.  It is pretty clear to us that the arrest of an innocent APPO member for Brad’s death flows from this bias. 

PGR’s Selective Use of Significant Witnesses & Witness Fabrications

· Canadian investigators cite Miriam Torres as a significant witness.  All statements by Torres are a total fabrication.  As mentioned before, Brad never lived in the Navarro house.

· A significant witness statement that is missing in the report is that of a demonstrator who was crouching directly in front of Brad.  In a sworn statement he said that he heard and felt a bullet pass by his head and when he turned around he saw Brad falling down after being struck by that bullet.

· Other significant witness statements missing include sworn statements of journalists at the scene. They said that it was impossible that anyone could have shot twice at close range without their noticing it.

Motive, Opportunity & Means Not Pursued by PGR

    At least five paramilitaries were photographed holding and shooting guns. 

Municipal Police officers advanced down Juarez Avenue several times firing their guns at the demonstrators.

Raul Estrella photographed paramilitary Pedro Carmona shooting at him twice, prior to Brad being shot.  Pedro Carmona was never interviewed by the PGR.  Why not?  Is it not a crime in Mexico to shoot at a photojournalist?  Isn’t that attempted murder? 

Minutes prior to Brad being shot, photographer Oswald Ramierez was shot in the leg.  No one has claimed that he was shot by a nearby APPO member.  Why would these facts not support a hypothesis that a paramilitary probably shot Brad? 

Two of the five paramilitaries photographed holding guns were never interviewed.

Physicians for Human Rights Report

The experts from the Physicians for Human Rights are adamant in their report that the damage to the bullet is consistent with a ricochet and did not occur at the autopsy.  Red paint on the bullet was already visible on a photograph taken at the autopsy, rather than having been “painted by someone to designate it” later on as claimed by the PGR and now reiterated by the Canadian investigators. The Physicians for Human Rights will be issuing their own response to the Canadian investigation shortly.

National Commission for Human Rights Report

Sound Analysis / Distance of Shot

     The Canadian investigators analysis of NCHR sound data came up with a distance of 17.28 meters, as opposed to the NCHR's estimate of 40 - 50 meters. As noted by the Canadians, there are a number of variables in a sound analysis and the interpretation of sound is subjective. In addition, the Canadian investigators acknowledge that they are not sound engineers or experts in the field.

     Clearly, Brad was not shot from close range.  It should be noted that the red truck was located 35.7 meters away directly in front of Brad. The best explanation that fits the facts was that Brad was shot from behind the red truck (no shooter in view of Brad's camera, the demonstrator’s testimony, Brad holding the camera with his shoulders squared, shooting straight ahead).

This important sound analysis should have been reviewed with the NCHR experts and the NCHR estimate of 40 - 50 meters should not be discarded without further study.

RCMP report reaffirms Mexico's claims about the murder of Indymedia reporter Brad Will in Oaxaca

Read the Will family's response to the "RCMP investigation."

I didn't translate this article because I think it's good. Actually, it's horrible.  As you likely know, in October 2006, Indymedia journalist Brad Will was shot and killed in Oaxaca while covering the uprising there.  There is much evidence, including the images below, a report by Mexico's National Human Rights Commission, and another report by Physicians for Human Rights, that conclude that Will was shot from a distance - implicating the paramilitaries unleashed by the Oaxaca state government.

However, Mexico's Federal Attorney General has forwarded the theory that Will was shot at close range by a protester and has arrested and charged APPO member Juan Manuel Martinez Moreno with the murder.  This theory and subsequent arrest has been extensively dismissed as preposterous and is viewed largely as a ploy to appease the U.S. into releasing Plan Mexico funds and to keep the ruling party in Oaxaca, the PRI, cooperating with the national ruling party, the PAN.

Enter the RCMP and the article below.  The RCMP study, done this month, corroborates the Mexican state's absurd version of events.  However, reading the article, especially the end, one can see just how shoddy an investigation it was and how biased against the APPO and Brad Will the RCMP is.  It really raises more questions than it answers, namely about the relationship between the RCMP and the Mexican police and Attorney General.

But worst of all is that this report will undoubtedly be used by the government to railroad an innocent man while the real killers, known to all and protected by the state, remain free.

The real killers of Brad Will

Canada: Will assassinated at point-blank range

Wednesday, July 29, 2009
By Guido Peña
[Spanish original]
Translated by Scott Campbell

The document, done at the request of the PGR (Mexican Federal Attorney General’s Office), concludes that the killer was standing at a distance of between 70 centimeters and 12 meters from the U.S. photographer when he fired the first shot; the second occurred while the now deceased was moved to a vehicle.

Mexico City. - A report by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, dated July 17, confirms that the U.S. video-journalist Brad Will, killed on October 27, 2006, while covering the social conflict in Oaxaca, died as a result of two shots fired at a short distance by a gunman located to the right of the victim, a conclusion that overturns the thesis that the blasts came from a distance as far away as 50 meters.

The document - done at the request of the Federal Attorney General’s Office by James Stephen, forensic pathologist; Phil Ziegler, firearms and ballistics expert, and Gary Buerk, head of the homicide division, all three members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (equivalent to the Mexican Federal Police) - concludes: “(the killer) was standing (at a distance of) between 12.20 and 0.70 meters (from Will) when he fired the first shot. The shooter was standing in front of Will and to the right, outside of the camera angle. There was no ricochet. The second shot was fired after Will had fallen to the ground, while he was being carried and before he was placed in a vehicle” which would bring him to a Red Cross station.

As such, the Canadian investigation, a copy of which Milenio has, affirms the PGR version that the U.S. video-journalist died from shots coming from a short distance.
The results also differ from the expert analysis of the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH), which concluded that the video-journalist was hit by two successive shots from the same weapon, both fired by the same person at a distance between 35 and 50 meters.

Also, the CNDH released on September 28, 2008, a recommendation to the Mexican Attorney General, Eduardo Medina Mora; to the Governor of Oaxaca, Ulises Ruiz, and to the Congress of that state that they investigate public officials’ irregularities during the investigations of the murder of Will.

The CNDH report determined that: a) two wounds were present, caused by a projectile from a firearm; b) the two bullets came from the same weapon; c) there was only one victim; d) there were three perforations of the t-shirt caused by projectiles from a firearm, and e) the shots were fired from a distance of 35 and 50 meters.

Also, the CNDH reproached the PGR experts that “discarded out of hand that the shot came from more than 32 meters, even though a shooting expert showed that he could hit the target from that distance.”

The account

In the independent analysis of the murder of Bradley Ronald [sic] Will in Oaxaca, Mexico, on October 27, 2006, the Royal Mounted Police recount that on this day Will videotaped activities of the Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca (APPO) - the coalition of organizations that demanded that resignation of Governor Ulises Ruiz - in Santa Lucía del Camino, a municipality belonging to the metropolitan zone of Oaxaca, in the Central Valleys region, adjacent to the state capital.

Armando Calderón, a resident of Santa Lucía, was traveling in his vehicle when he ran into one of the barricades that the APPO put up in the area; he got out of the car and began to remove it. The activists reprimanded and chased him. Calderón ran to the city hall to ask for help. Meanwhile, APPO sympathizers burned his car. The column of smoke drew the media, among them Will.  Residents and APPO members clashed with rocks, fireworks, Molotov cocktails, and gun shots, which is why the municipal police intervened without being in uniform.

An unknown individual began to fire a pistol in the area of the APPO sympathizers.  The APPO members chased the attacker, who appeared to hide himself in a house located at 311 Juarez St.  At this point, the opponents of Ruiz put a truck sideways to use as a barricade.  Meanwhile, APPO members and neighbors were absorbed in a shootout.  The uniformed police began to shoot into the air in order to deter the multitude.  Will recorded, protected by a pickup truck, on Juárez Street, near the intersection with Árboles Street.  He then received a bullet wound on his right flank. The report states that a controversy exists regarding at what moment the second shot occurred.

Those near Will carried him after being shot to a vehicle parked at Juárez and Árboles in order to take him to a Red Cross station.  The car had a malfunction, so he was transported in another vehicle.  The victim died in transit.  The autopsy was done the same day.

The Canadian report included Brad Will’s resume, whose name was Bradley Ronald [sic] Will.  “He was a U.S. citizen. He worked as an independent journalist. He entered Mexico illegally in early 2006.  Before establishing himself in Mexico he did independent work as a reporter on guerilla conflicts in Central America.  Will was interested in the APPO movement […] Will was videotaping dissident activity in Mexico State when he met Francisco Navarro, member of the APPO.  He traveled to Oaxaca with Navarro.  When he died he was staying in Navarro’s house.

Police analysis

In the report, the Canadian police believe the investigation done by the Oaxacan Attorney General’s Office to be unsatisfactory: “The area of the incident was not controlled or secured.  Through this omission valuable evidence was surely lost.  They did not make an effort to track down and interrogate eye-witnesses to the incident […] The autopsy was also unsatisfactory.  It was done in a manner which probably damaged more than preserved the evidence.  We believe that in fact the bullet recovered from Will’s column was damaged.  The damage was done with a mallet, chisel and tweezers.  We do not believe that the bullet hit an intermediate target before impacting with Will.”

The report indicates that the two shots came from the same weapon: the first shot happened in front of him, out of the angle of the camera, at a range of greater than 70 centimeters. The second shot came from the right flank, while he was moved in a face-up position (lying with his back down) to the vehicle that ultimately malfunctioned, also from a relatively short distance.

In the document, disagreements are expressed with “the CNDH expert, María de Lourdes Larrieta Carrasco, who studied the sound recordings, establishing a difference of 0.166 seconds between the firing of the bullet and its impact with Will’s body. The speed of sound was not used in her calculations.”

They also emphasized that a review of Will’s video before he received the first impact did not allow for the identification of the shooter. “Said video, as well as all the film and photographs available, have been exhaustively examined by several investigators obtaining negative results.” From there they conclude that the shooter was on foot, outside of the journalist’s camera angle.

The experts mention that before the video-journalist was shot, it can be seen in the video a man concealed with a black scarf.  This person looks at Will, immediately looks at someone outside of the camera angle and sits.  Later this individual was identified as Niguas, but to date has not been located.

The supporting documents

The conclusions of the Canadian police depart widely from the analysis of the CNDH and Physicians for Human Rights reports such as the reconstruction of the events carried out on July 14, 2009, in Santa Lucía del Camino, Oaxaca.

The Canadian investigators tried to reproduce the scene of the crime, however, the report notes, “given the political situation at the time of our visit it was not possible to create a detailed reconstruction of the scene.”

They also mention that the t-shirt that Will wore when he died “is located at present as evidence in the Oaxacan Superior Court of Justice.  A visit to the court to examine the t-shirt had been planned; however, protesters obstructed the building, which is why we were not able to carry out a visit to the courts.”

Likewise, they specify that their commentary and conclusions were based on their review of various materials, such as PGR reports, videos, photographs and evidence - among them the two bullets removed from the video-journalist - as well as interviews with individuals involved in the investigation and witnesses.

The Canadian experts say in their report: “We found that the investigation conducted by the Coordination of Expert Services of the PGR was carried out in a competent manner from a technical point of view, taking considerable caution to be precise and complete.  We believe that the investigation was done in an impartial manner, with an open mind as to all possible theories.  Modern forensic techniques were utilized throughout the entire PGR investigation.”