14 Socabaya Prison, in Arequipa (hereinafter “Socabaya Prison”). She suffered from a chronic throat infection all the time she was confined in the Yanamayo Prison. There was a prison doctor who prescribed medication for a circulatory illness from which she suffered. During the first 18 months, she also suffered from a problem in her hands, known as Reynaud syndrome. The Red Cross provided her with medicines. In 2000, the Military Supreme Court annulled the operative paragraph of the judgment that convicted her of treason. The probative grounds for this annulment were a fact that had occurred in August or September 1999. Four people who had been held hostage in the residence of the Japanese Ambassador “were convinced” that the alleged victim was not a leader of the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (hereinafter “MRTA”). These testimonies opened the door to filing an appeal for review. Then, the Supreme Council of Military Justice ordered the transfer of the military case file to the civil jurisdiction. The witness was notified of the ruling of the Supreme Council of Military Justice on August 27 or 28, 2000, and she was taken to Lima on August 31, 2000. The day she arrived at the prison, Prosecutor Peralta Ramírez and Judge Borda were there; they wanted to open the pre-trial investigation the same day, even though she had no lawyer. She did not have a lawyer even when the new examining judge began to question witnesses. The day of her arrival, they asked for her “particulars” and intended to continue questioning her, but she refused. On the following days, her next of kin submitted a brief in order to “find a lawyer”; to do this, they had to travel from the United States. When her defense lawyer had been appointed, she was able to talk to him the day he was hired and, later, another day for half an hour, in the locutory, in order to prepare her defense before the hearing. He was a new lawyer and only had a couple of hours that same day to review the file before she made her statement. The problem stemmed from the fact that there was only one copy of the file in the Chamber, which was shared with the judge and the prosecutor, and they only loaned it when they were not consulting it. The Chamber was not in the prison. During the first month and a half, the time she could meet with her lawyer was limited, because the times for judicial procedures coincided with visiting times for lawyers. The plenary stage took place in the Trial Chamber in the Lurigancho Prison, one and a half hours away from the Chorrillos Women’s Prison. There, they built a platform inside a sort of fenced-in place that was like a “cage” where they placed a special stand, so that the press could see her inside the “cage.” During the first few days, the trial was more like an address to the media than a judicial proceeding. The moderator was a candidate for Ombudsman. The environment was “hostile” to the defense; any witnesses summoned by the Chamber, “who did not say what they wanted to hear, were treated badly, with hostility and ridicule.” When the formal questioning began, the first thing the prosecutor did was to refer to the validity of the evidence obtained in the military jurisdiction. The presiding Judge, Marcos Ibazeta Merino, was challenged because, in 1999, in an interview on the issue of prisoners who were taking their cases to the Inter-American Commission, he had said he considered it “illogical” that such cases were submitted and affirmed that they should not be admissible.