70. The Regional Prosecutor’s Office stated that several affidavits led to the conclusion that these individuals were the masterminds behind the murder, and that “another incriminating situation arose, which [was] the personal friendship, business, and political ties […] among these three defendants, whereby adversely affecting one of them would adversely affect all of them; they had declared their shared political ideology, which made it possible to infer that they conspired in the decision to kill their opponent and public critic.” It also cited the death threats that Bermúdez made to Nelson Carvajal. With regard to the alleged direct perpetrator, the Prosecutor’s Office maintained that many situations converged to create serious circumstantial evidence of responsibility, including the statements of eyewitnesses. 71. As stated earlier, based on this conclusion, the Regional Prosecutor’s Office evaluated the evidence produced during investigation and filed criminal charges against these three defendants (supra para. 56). c. Perpetration by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) 72. During the pretrial phase of the criminal proceeding, and based on defense testimony at trial (infra paras. 81-86), an alternative theory was asserted to suggest that the crime was masterminded by guerrillas from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (hereinafter “FARC”). The case filed indicates that the Single Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit accepted “the defense theory that the perpetrators of Mr. Carvajal’s death were FARC members,” in spite of the fact that this working hypothesis had been ruled out by the Prosecutor’s Office because it was “inconsistent and a setup" by the defendants.59 73. The Single Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit indicated that it received the statement of defense witness Mario Enrique Rincón Contreras, “who, in a detailed, precise, in-depth, and substantiated manner, made it known that the second-in-command of the 13th Front of the FARC, [alias Oswaldo Patiño], was the person who ordered the murder of journalist Nelson Carvajal Carvajal, which was carried out by Fabio Córdoba.”60 The commander of the “Magdalena” Infantry Battalion No. 27 told the Court that Mr. Mario Enrique Rincón Contreras appeared in the records of that institution as “an occasional informant.” 61 For its part, the Administrative Security Department (DAS) informed the court that its records contain “an intelligence note provided by an occasional source, stating that [alias Fredy], a guerrilla supporter assigned to intelligence duties for the ‘Cacique Gaitana’ 13th guerrilla unit of the FARC, was apparently the direct perpetrator of the murder of journalist Nelson Carvajal Carvajal.”62 74. According to the judgment, upon reiterating that the accusations against him were “absolutely false,” the local builder and former town council member asked the judge to hear testimony from Samboní Ortiz and Carlos Rojas “given the importance of the information, from a good source, that the crime was perpetrated by the FARC.”63 75. In this regard, as stated in the judgment of the Single Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit, defense witness Samboní Ortiz testified that five days after being linked to the Radio Sur radio station, a phone call was received where the caller asked specifically to speak with him. He indicated that “When [he] answered the call, a voice that sounded like it belonged to a young man stated in a clear tone, verbatim, 59 2003. Communication from the Colombian State dated August 15, 2003. DDH.22027, pp. 5-6. Received by the IACHR on August 19, 60 Attachment 3. Single Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit. Neiva, Huila. Judgment of December 15, 2000, p. 38. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication dated October 17, 2002. 61 Attachment 3. Single Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit. Neiva, Huila. Judgment of December 15, 2000, p. 38. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication dated October 17, 2002. 62 Attachment 3. Single Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit. Neiva, Huila. Judgment of December 15, 2000, p. 9. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication dated October 17, 2002. 63 Attachment 3. Single Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit. Neiva, Huila. Judgment of December 15, 2000, p. 9. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication dated October 17, 2002.