Attorney Dickie Bradley appeared at court in an attempt to secure bail for Melvin Young, who has been charged with abetment to murder in the death of Liston McField.Superintendent Gerald Bernard, head of the Prosecution Branch, also appeared to argue the Police's case before Chief Magistrate Herbert Lord. The prosecution vehemently objected to bail.
Superintendent Bernard said that about a day before McField was killed, Young instigated, solicited and facilitated Lincoln Allen and George Mckenzie to murder Liston McField.
According to the Police, two weapons were used in the murder. These weapons, they say, were supplied to the gunmen by Young.
"We hope to recover the gun," said Bernard. He intimated that Young’s release on bail could hamper the Police in their attempt to recover the gun. A Justice should not be interfered with," said Bernard. (One of the guns Police claim was used in McField’s murder, a sawed-off shotgun, was retrieved from Pink’s Alley, a.k.a Majestic Alley, about two weeks ago.)
In response, Bradley said: "Young is entitled to bail and I want the court to take judicial notice of this. Six charges were read to Young and all the complainants came and withdrew the charges. Bradley then took out some fishermen cooperatives statements and said that Young made $130,000 in 1993 alone. (The Police had seized $186,000 in cash they found at Young’s Vista del Mar home early last week.)
Bradley went even further to say that, "I challenge the Solicitor General and others to show him which law makes Young not entitled to bail. The only offenses not bailable are treason and murder."
"They find a rusty gun behind Majestic, not in the accused's vehicle; they find $180,000 in his house and are saying that he is so small to run around with Junie Balls and Big Crip with rusty guns. He is innocent until proven guilty," said Bradley.
Superintendent Bernard rose once more, and said: "After that money was shown on T.V. people just ran into court and began withdrawing their cases against Young - the course of justice is being perverted.
Abetment is like murder and the penalty is death by hanging. Where the sentence is death by hanging the accused cannot get bail," said Bernard.
Shortly afterwards, Chief Magistrate Herbert Lord ruled that the defendant be remanded in custody until January 2, 1998. </text>
In April 1992, the station reported a source's claim that ORPA leader "Comandante Everardo" had allegedly been recently killed in combat in Quiche.
In late May 1992, the Department of Defense (DOD) disseminated an intelligence report indicating that the Guatemalan government was concerned by the precedent set by the Human Rights Ombudsman's office in filing a request directly with the courts rather than through the attorney general's office to exhume a body at the request of a "Mr. Bamaca" whose son was believed to be buried in the grave. Twelve bodies were presumed to be in the grave.
In May 1993, the station learned from a source recounting the apparent accuracy of the stories being told by "Willy" and "Carlos" (escaped guerrillas Jaime Adalberto Augustin Recinos and Santiago Cabrera Lopez) regarding captured guerrillas being held in clandestine prison cells by the Guatemalan military, including their description of particular captured insurgents--including Bamaca. The source reported an allegation that Bamaca was alive, but he could neither confirm nor refute the allegation.
In September l993, DOD disseminated an intelligence report claiming that clandestine military prisons had "always" existed in Guatemala, and that guerrilla prisoners were commonly held incommunicado in isolated military zone locations, interrogated, and killed after the army had extracted all useful information from them. It was also reported that Bamaca had been held incommunicado, interrogated a number of times, and killed, and his body disposed of in an unidentified location.
In May 1994, the station disseminated an intelligence report that a source claimed that unidentified D-2 officers took Bamaca away shortly after his capture and that was the last the source had heard anything about Bamaca's whereabouts or status. The source had also suggested that Bamaca was in good health at the time.
In June and August 1994, the station reported that it had heard that the escaped guerrillas' testimony that they had seen Bamaca alive in a clandestine prison was fabricated in order to support the guerrillas' propaganda objectives. Reportedly Bamaca had actually died shortly after being wounded and captured in the fire fight with the army.
In October 1994, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source stating that Bamaca's capture was viewed as a great success because Bamaca was the only important indigenous guerrilla leader--as opposed to those of mixed "Spanish-indigenous" descent--at the time. He also said that to the best of his knowledge Bamaca died of his wounds shortly after his capture.
In early November 1994, DOD disseminated an intelligence report saying that the army reportedly did not have Bamaca in custody and speculating that if the army knew where Bamaca was, whether dead or alive, it would turn him over to end the media attention. The report also described the practice by which the Guatemalan army reputedly interrogated captured guerrillas and then forced them to work for army intelligence or face summary execution.
In early November 1994, DOD disseminated an intelligence report saying that Bamaca had reportedly received a relatively minor wound in the arm in a firefight near Retalhuleu, was captured, and was interrogated at Retalhuleu and later at San Marcos. Because of Bamaca's importance and because of his repeated attempts to escape, he was encased in a full body cast to prevent escape. The report indicated that Bamaca may have been questioned for about a month in San Marcos by military intelligence division officers, and talked freely about the guerrillas' policies, personnel, and activities, but provided false information on arms caches. After the military intelligence division decided Bamaca was no longer of use, it issued an order that he be killed and sent a D-2 helicopter which took Bamaca away from San Marcos still alive. The report speculated that Bamaca had probably been dumped at sea, which may be why the government could not now produce the body. DOD had disseminated a report in April 1994 which suggested that in the mid-1980's, the D-2 often dumped guerrillas from aircraft into the sea to eliminate evidence that prisoners had been tortured and killed.
In early November 1994, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source who said that the description of Bamaca did not match that of the guerrilla killed in the firefight on March 12, 1992. The report recounted an observation that the army may have substituted another guerrilla's body for that of Bamaca, who was apparently killed elsewhere to cover up evidence of torture.
Also in November 1994, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source who said that Bamaca was dead and that Jennifer Harbury's efforts to draw international attention would only bring condemnation on the Guatemalan government and strain relations between Guatemala and the international community.
In mid-November 1994, DOD heard that Bamaca had been interrogated in San Marcos principally by Majors Soto and Sosa. This report claimed that Bamaca was uncooperative and tried to escape and was, therefore, incapacitated in a full body cast.
In mid-November 1994, DOD disseminated a report indicating that Bamaca was dead and recounting an allegation that Bamaca's remains were in a place that made them "impossible" to recover.
In mid-November 1994, the station disseminated an intelligence report indicating that the guerrillas apparently did not know what happened to Bamaca after March 12, 1992, but that they felt Bamaca could still be alive only if he had betrayed the guerrillas and cooperated with the army. In case Bamaca had cooperated and was still alive, it was reported that the guerrillas believed Jennifer Harbury's demonstrations would force the army to kill Bamaca and thereby remove a threat to the URNG. They believed, however, that Bamaca was probably dead, and the report recounted that the URNG intelligence apparatus had been sending Harbury fabricated reports that Bamaca was alive in order to encourage her highly visible political activities against the Guatemalan government.
In mid-November 1994, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source who had heard that Bamaca had surrendered without resistance, was turned over to the G-2 in San Marcos, and was held at San Marcos and Santa Ana Berlin, Quetzaltenango Department.
In late November 1994, the station heard from two sources who offered their views on Bamaca's fate. One speculated that Bamaca may have died of his wounds while being interrogated.
In late November 1994, DOD disseminated an intelligence report recounting that it was believed that Bamaca had died of his wounds shortly after the firefight in March 1992.
In early December 1994, the station disseminated an intelligence report stating that a source said that Bamaca was captured unharmed or lightly wounded and may have been alive for four or five weeks. The source opined that he had probably been killed once he had outlived his usefulness. He also said that Bamaca's high-level guerrilla rank was not discovered until after his death. The report also stated that Colonel Alpirez took charge of Bamaca's interrogation.
In early December 1994, DOD disseminated an intelligence report stating that on March 12, 1992, Guatemalan journalists were shown the bodies of two guerrillas, one of whom they were told was Bamaca (who was described to them as only a platoon lieutenant, not a higher-level commander). After the journalists examined a diary taken from the body reported to be Bamaca's and photographed the body, a civil judge came to record the deaths.
It appeared to be normal procedure for then-Human Rights Ombudsman De Leon both to receive all information about guerrillas captured by the army and to take custody of any guerrillas released after they agreed to give up their armed struggle. The DOD report commented that in light of all of the reports of Bamaca's capture, at least one of these observers had probably been duped into thinking that a dead guerrilla was Bamaca.
In mid-December 1994, the station learned from a source that he had heard that Alpirez, Major Raul Oliva, and Colonel Leonel Godoy had "worked with" Bamaca after his capture. The source did not know if Bamaca was dead or alive but assured the station that Bamaca was not killed in San Marcos. The source also described a burial site for guerrillas killed in the attack on Bamaca's column, but said that Bamaca was not buried there.
In mid-January I995, the station was informed by a source that he had heard that an official who had investigated the Bamaca case had found witnesses to Bamaca's suicide. The information was passed only to the DO.
In late January 1995, the station disseminated a report from a source who said that he had been told that it was known within the senior ranks of the army that Alpirez had killed Bamaca.
In early February 1995, DOD disseminated a report saying that Alpirez had reportedly overseen the interrogation of Bamaca. The report did not recount any allegations about who had actually killed Bamaca, but expressed doubt that Alpirez would have personally done so.
In late February l995, the station disseminated an intelligence report stating that sources said the Guatemalan government had conducted three separate investigations of the Bamaca case and had decided that he died of his wounds soon after the firefight and that his identity was not discovered until one or two days later.
In early March 1995, DOD disseminated a report indicating that Bamaca had probably not been held at either of two Pacific naval bases in Guatemala.
In early March 1995, the station disseminated an intelligence report stating that the Minister of Defense had said that a body exhumed in the search for Bamaca's remains (presumably in August 1993) was indeed Bamaca's. Reportedly, the judge who had claimed otherwise had been paid to say so, but would soon testify in court that it had been Bamaca's.
In mid-March l995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report which recounted that there was no body of Bamaca for the Guatemalans to produce. It gave no further details.
In March I995, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source who said that, at the time of Bamaca's capture, he was visited at San Marcos by senior officers. The source added that he believed the army would stick to its story that Bamaca died in the firefight.
In March 1995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report recounting rumors that Bamaca's body had been thrown in to a river on an unknown date.
In early April 1995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report indicating that Bamaca had led soldiers to locate an arms cache on Santiaguito volcano in Military Zone 1715, where they were ambushed by guerrillas. The officer in charge, Lieutenant Colonel Jesus Aguirre, was reportedly wounded, and in his anger ordered Bamaca killed, possibly by being thrown into the active volcano. The report suggested that it would be easy to determine exactly when this occurred because Aguirre's wounds were so severe that he traveled to Houston, Texas for treatment. It added that Aguirre had visited the United States in 1992 from March I8 to June 5, and from September 6 to September 30. The second trip was reportedly to Houston for unspecified medical reasons. (Escaped guerrilla Santiago Cabrera has stated that Aguirre had been wounded and left San Marcos before Bamaca's capture and did not participate in his interrogations. A March 1992 station report corroborates that Aguirre was seriously wounded two weeks before Bamaca's capture.)
In early April 1995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report indicating that Alpirez had been in command of an anti-guerrilla operation away from headquarters during the time Bamaca was captured. The DOD report noted, however, that in public testimony before the Attorney General, Alpirez had stated that his duties at the time were administrative, not operational.
In mid-April 1995, an internal DOD intelligence report indicated that Bamaca had reportedly been wounded in the shoulder during the March 12 firefight and had been taken to the Santa Ana Berlin military installation for treatment and interrogation. During this time Colonel Alpirez, from the San Marcos military zone, visited Santa Ana Berlin to follow the situation. Colonel Alpirez reportedly ordered that Bamaca be put in a full body cast to prevent his escape. Bamaca was then moved to several different places in Guatemala for interrogation and then eliminated. The report did not provide details on Bamaca's death.
In April 1995, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source who had heard that Bamaca was buried at the Cabanas army detachment, which was located in the village of Montanita on the Cabuz River. The source was unable to provide any other details on what had happened to Bamaca.
In early May 1995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report recounting that Bamaca was reportedly dead, but it gave no further details or the basis for this statement.
In May 1995, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source who said he had heard that Alpirez was not involved in the death of Bamaca, but that Bamaca had been turned over to military intelligence in Guatemala City at some point after his capture.
In May 1995, the station reported to its headquarters that the embassy had informed it that Angel Nery Urizar Garcia--who claimed to have seen Bamaca alive at Santa Ana Berlin military detachment at some point in 1992 when Urizar was affiliated with the D-2 and posted to the region--was reportedly under the protection of Guatemalan human rights authorities and claimed to have been the subject of an assassination attempt. The station soon afterwards disseminated a report to its headquarters and to CIA analysts that a source had confirmed that Urizar was an enlisted man who worked for G-2 in the San Marcos region when Bamaca was captured. The source said that Urizar's claim that the army had killed and buried a former guerrilla in Bamaca's place appeared to be credible, as the army wanted to interrogate Bamaca but have the public believe he had been killed.
In June 1995, the station relayed to its headquarters a source's report that Colonel Alpirez had Bamaca's interrogation report, but the source had no specific information that Alpirez had killed Bamaca. He believed Alpirez was capable of it, but felt Alpirez would not have acted without orders.
In June 1995, the station disseminated an intelligence report that a source stated that there was a rumor circulating in the Guatemalan army that the search for Bamaca's remains at the Cabanas detachment was futile because Bamaca's body had been burned.
In July 1995, the station disseminated an intelligence report from a source who said that the Guatemalan government felt it unfortunate that Nery Urizar Garcia had claimed that the army had buried another guerrilla in Bamaca's place. The source reported speculation that if Bamaca s body were not found at the gravesite (apparently at Las Cabanas), it was because the guerrillas had switched the body.
In early July 1995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report in which it was said that Colonel Alpirez had been heard to say to someone in the Solicitor General's office that he had been the second commander of a combined task force made up of units from military zones 18 and 1715, which was under the command of Colonel Haroldo Antulio Ruano Del Cid and headquartered at Santa Ana Berlin. Alpirez reportedly stated that task force patrols had used Bamaca as a guide to lead them to hidden weapons caches and that one of these patrols, led by Major Jesus Efrain Aguirre Loarca, had been ambushed and Aguirre wounded. According to Alpirez, the decision was then made to eliminate Bamaca, but Colonel Ruano would not take responsibility for the decision, which was referred to Colonel Harry Ponce, the Military Zone 18 commander, who referred it to the D-2 in Guatemala City. Colonel Otto Perez Molina, the D-2 director, reportedly then flew to Santa Ana Berlin with Colonel Hector Mario Barrios Celada to pick up Bamaca in a helicopter piloted by Captain Erwin Sosa Lara. Alpirez allegedly did not know where Bamaca's body was located. The DOD report noted that Colonel Ruano was assigned at the time as the deputy director of a military high school; such an assignment would make it unusual for him to have commanded an operational task force.
In early July 1995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report recounting that President Serrano had been told that Bamaca's remains were not at Las Cabanas military detachment, where Jennifer Harbury was seeking an exhumation--but that there were clandestine cemeteries in that general area with the bodies of other victims.
In July 1995, the station disseminated an intelligence report that a source stated that some Guatemalan officials felt that the government should use legal maneuvers to obstruct the grave excavation at Cabanas military detachment. They feared that an exhumation there would indeed unearth guerrilla remains and lead to calls for exhumations elsewhere. In early August l995, DOD disseminated an intelligence report recounting speculation that Colonel Alpirez may know exactly who killed Bamaca and when and how--and that he may be holding this information as his "ace in the hole."
In late February 1996, DOD disseminated an intelligence report stating that the Guatemalan government had obtained declassified CIA documents relating to Bamaca's capture. These documents made no mention of Major Sosa Orellana, who had reportedly ordered the murder of another insurgent who was then passed off as that of Bamaca.
In late March 1996, DOD disseminated a new account of Bamaca's fate from a March 1996 letter to the embassy purportedly from "PREGUA," allegedly a group of disaffected army officers. According to this account, Bamaca was captured and interrogated over the course of a year in various military zones and in Guatemala City with the knowledge of the leadership of the Guatemalan army and numerous army officers identified by name. The letter stated that the recent allegation that another guerrilla was killed and buried in Bamaca's place was true. Reportedly after the efforts of Bamaca's wife focused greater attention on the Bamaca case, President Serrano, Minister of Government Perdomo, Minister of Defense Garcia Samayoa, Army Chief of Staff Perussina Rivera, Chief of the Presidential Military Staff Ortega Menaldo, and D-2 chief Colonel Perez Molina met to consider the situation. Although all participants except Colonel Perez Molina supported releasing Bamaca, it was allegedly decided that Colonel Perez Molina would take care of the problem. According to the account, Colonel Perez then ordered his subordinates to kill Bamaca, and the order was carried out by D-2 enlisted men near Guatemala's southern coast, with Bamaca's body being buried or burned in a sugar cane field. The DOD report commented that many of the persons named in the letter were indeed at the relevant time in the positions that were asserted in the letter, but that the letter appeared to have been written by different authors than an earlier letter purportedly from the same group, and that it appeared unlikely that such a high level group would have deferred to Colonel Perez Molina on what to do with Bamaca. The report also noted that although the document listed 25 officers who were aware of or involved in Bamaca's interrogation, it did not include two officers who have been included in many other accounts--Colonel Alpirez and Lieutenant Colonel Soto Bilbao.
In late April 1996, DOD disseminated an intelligence reporting a belief that the sort of high-level meeting to decide Bamaca's fate alleged by the 'PREGUA" letter could have occurred. The report also recounted speculation that three likely candidates as the author of the letter were Colonel Alfredo Merida Gonzalez (a former D-2 chief known to have written anonymous letters before) and Colonel Alpirez and Lieutenant Colonel Juan Gillermo Oliva Carrera (both of whom had been mentioned in earlier accounts of the case but were completely absent from the PREGUA letter).
</text>