suicide. Later, expert Harry Shibata testified at trial that he never saw Vladimir Herzog’s body.129 (infra párr. 105) 93. In the investigation’s framework, the journalists George Benigno Duque Estrada and Rodolfo Osvaldo Konder, who had been in custody at the Second Army’s DOI/CODI/SP since October 24, 1975, testified as witnesses in the presence of authorities from the headquarters of the Second Army Command on October 31, 1975.130 The case file indicates that years later, in the state police inquiry open in 1992 (infra párr. 118), Konder stated the following: when he was interrogated about the events as part of the military investigation, he was already under stress because of the circumstances of the torture. Moreover, the only persons present when he testified were military personnel; no attorney was present to represent him. Mindful that he would have to return to the DOI/CODI following his testimony, he thought that the prudent course of action was not to reveal the truth, i.e., the truth about his torture and Vladimir’s torture. 131 For his part, Duque Estrada stated in 1992 that the majority of the statements he made during the military police investigation “[we]re false, because they were words put in his mouth by the Military Prosecutor in that military police investigation […], especially the witness’ statement to the effect that Vladimir had not been tortured, when in fact he was.”132 Duque Estrada also stated that “when he gave his testimony, he was not represented by counsel and was very much aware of the fact that he would have go back to the DOI/CODI/SP, which is why he tempered his accusations for fear of what might happen to him when he went back there.” 133 94. General Fernando Cerqueira requested that other measures be taken “so that there could be no criticism of how [the military police investigation] was run.” 134 He ordered an additional forensics report,135 which was assigned to experts Armando Canger Rodrigues and Arildo de Toledo Viana, who on November 10, 1975 corroborated the version given at the time and stated, inter alia, that “no evidence was present of any kind of mortal injury capable of classifying the cause of death as violence or as death due to some natural pathological cause.” They concluded that “death was from asphyxiation by hanging.” 136 New witnesses were also heard, among them Lieutenant Colonel Audir Santos Maciel, 137 journalists Luiz Weis,138 Anthony Jorge Andrade de Christo,139 and Paulo Sergio Markun,140 the police investigator with the Second 129 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 2, fls. 441– Declaración de Harry Shibata en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 16 de mayo de 1978. 130 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 3, fls. 495, Despacho en el Inquérito Policial Militar, del 31 de octubre de 1975. 131 Texto original: “[q]uando foi interrogado a respeito dos fatos, já vinha abalado pelas circunstancias de torturas já descritas anteriormente, sendo ouvido somente na presença de militares, sem acompanhamento de qualquer advogado; que, ciente de que deveria retornar ao DOI CODI apos ali ser ouvido, o depoente, logicamente, achou prudente não revelar a verdade real dos fatos, qual seja, a sua tortura e a [tortura] de [V]ladimir”. Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 5, fls. 888 verso, Declaración de Rodolfo Osvaldo Konder en el Inquérito Policial No 704/92, del 3 de junio de 1992. 132 Texto original: “[a] maior parte das afirmações ali contidas, são inverídicas, já que impostas pelo Procurador que atuou naquele IPM [...], principalmente quanto ao fato de ter sido mencionado pelo depoente que [V]ladimir não havia sido torturado, ja que realmente o havia sido”. Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 5, fls. 891 verso, Declaración de George Benigno Jathay en el Inquérito Policial No 704/92, del 3 de junio de 1992. 133 Texto original: “quando do depoimento, o fez sem acompanhamento de advogado e ja ciente que deveria retornar ao DOI CODI a seguir, razão pela qual também moderou suas acusações, por receio do que lhe poderia acontecer no retorno aquele órgão”. Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 5, fls. 891 verso, Declaración de George Benigno Jathay en el Inquérito Policial No 704/92, del 3 de junio de 1992. 134 Relatório da Comissão Nacional da Verdade. Volume III. Parte III, “Mortos e desaparecidos políticos”, fls. 1796, del 10 de diciembre de 2014. 135 Relatório da Comissão Nacional da Verdade. Volume III. Parte III, “Mortos e desaparecidos políticos”, fls. 1795, del 10 de diciembre de 2014. 136 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 3, fls. 553 – Parecer Médico-Legal No. 241/75, del 10 de noviembre de 1975. 137 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 3, fls. 537/539, Declaración de Audir Santos Maciel en el Inquérito Policial Militar, del 5 de noviembre de 1975. 138 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 3, fls. 535/536, Declaración de Luis Weis en el Inquérito Policial Militar, del 4 de noviembre de 1975. 139 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 3, fls. 545/548, Declaración de Anthony Christo en el Inquérito Policial Militar, del 7 de noviembre de 1975. 140 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume Volume 3, fls. 542/544, Declaración de Paulo Markun en el Inquérito Policial Militar, del 7 de noviembre de 1975. 21