The sentence was handed down yesterday by the judge of the Seventh Criminal Court of Bogotá, Julio Roberto Ballén Silva.

“The murder of Jaime Garzón had a terrorist motive. The objective was to teach a lesson, instill fear and send a clear message to the intermediaries and family members of kidnap victims that resorting to mediation is unacceptable,” Judge Ballén Silva declared in pronouncing sentence.

The judge said that during the proceedings it had become clear that the AUC chief had declared Garzón a military target and ordered him to be killed.

In the same trial, two other defendants were acquitted. They were Juan Pablo Ortiz Agudelo, a.k.a. “Bochas,” and Edilberto Antonio Sierra Ayala, a.k.a. “Toño,” who were charged with having carried out the murder, which occurred at 5:30 a.m. on August 13, 1999 in the western Bogotá neighborhood of Quinta Paredes.

The judge ruled that the charges against them had been based on false testimony prepared in advance and with the obvious intention of throwing investigators off the trail.

He ordered copies of the testimony to be handed over to the relevant authorities so that the conduct of the Security Department (DAS) agents who carried out the investigation should itself be investigated. The allegedly false statements were made during the investigation by four witnesses, one of whom, identified as Wilson Javier Llano Caballero, was said to have been involved in the death of another person who had testified.

In his ruling, the judge also asked the Public Prosecutor’s Office “separately and immediately to conduct an investigation to determine who actually carried out the murder and others who might be involved in it and bring them to justice.”

In addition, he ordered a copy of the proceedings to be sent to the Supreme Court for it to look into the conduct of Senator Piedad Córdoba, who refused, without explanation, to testify during the trial.

A DEATH FORETOLD. “This is a similar case to the one mentioned by Nobel literature prize winner Gabriel García Márquez in his novel ‘Chronicle of a Death Foretold.’ Jaime Garzón learned that he was going to be killed, he told his family members and colleagues so and he could do nothing to prevent it,” Judge Ballén Silva said in his summing up, quoting parts of the prosecution’s case.

According to testimony and evidence produced during the trial, Garzón acted as a mediator to secure the release of a number of people kidnapped by guerrillas, taking advantage of his fame and professional standing. This led to criticism of him, which became more intense due to the fact that in some cases he acted without the knowledge and backing of the Cundinamarca municipal government, the judge declared in his ruling.

Garzón’s conduct aroused suspicions and he began to be accused of receiving money for his action. But during the trial it was shown that he had always acted only out of humanitarian and altruistic motives.

Castaño, however, declared him a military target after hearing some wiretapped telephone conversations of his with guerrilla leaders, with whom he spoke in familiar terms.

Garzón paid not attention to what he called this absurd order, but the paramilitary chief on learning of this tricked him and made him drop his guard. During the trial it was established that the two had some kind of communication with each other through a third party, Angel Custodio Gaitán Mahecha, who was at the time being held at the Model Prison in Bogotá for taking part in paramilitary activities a week before Garzón’s murder. Through this contact it is known that Castaño made a date for them to get together to talk. But Garzón was unable to get together with Castaño – the day before the appointment he was murdered by two men.

The judge said he believed that those who actually carried out the murder remain at large. It is thought that they may be trusted friends of Carlos Castaño.

An exceptional witness

The accusations against “Bochas” and “Toño” turned out to be a maneuver to throw the investigators off the trail and keep the real perpetrators and those behind the murder from being brought to justice, the judge said.

María Amparo Arroyabe was an exceptional eye-witness to Garzón’s murder. She told Security Department agents that she had seen everything from an apartment on the fourth floor of a building one block from where the incident occurred. She described the killers and helped a photo-kit picture of them to be made. She later identified them from photographs and in a police lineup.


According to her description, the person that fired the shots was 20 years old, he wore a ski mask and a black jacket, he was 5-feet-5 tall, he had a round face with thick eyebrows, a straight nose, olive-skinned, with small, thin-lipped mouth. She also described in detail the motorcycle, a 250 c.c. model with a white front mudguard and a red rear one. She even described the boots that the assailant wore, saying they were Brahma brand, her statement shows.

The judge called her statement implausible and in his ruling declared, “the opinion of those who said the witness was put up to it and her testimony lacked credibility is not so ridiculous.” On top of that, the witness disappeared and it was later shown that it was impossible to see where the murder was committed from the apartment window.