“voluntary suicide by hanging and not some act attributed to agents of the Federal Union.” 167 It therefore rejected the contention that the State bore any blame. 168 103. On March 16, 1978, the Federal Judge rejected the Federal Union’s preliminary arguments and scheduled a hearing to take testimony from witnesses. 169 The Federal Union appealed that decision, but the appeal was denied.170 104. In a brief dated May 16, 1978, Herzog’s next of kin asked that the Second Army clarify the information regarding the presence of an agent by the name of “Ubirajara” in the DOI/CODI/SP on the day of Vladimir Herzog’s death;171 they also requested that the person responsible for his “interrogation” be ordered to appear for trial.172 That same day, May 16, the hearing 173 was held with six witnesses testifying;174 of these, four had been in custody at the Second Army’s DOI/CODI/SP and stated that they had been subjected to physical and psychological torture. 105. At that hearing, physician Harry Shibata, one of the experts who signed the autopsy done on the body, confessed that “he had never seen Vladimir Herzog’s body.” 175 Journalist Anthony Christo testified that “he was not confirming the testimony given in the military police investigation; the witness stated that he had been tortured at the DOI/CODI facilities; he also said that he saw others who also appeared to have been tortured; that these statements were not included in his testimony based on the argument that they did nothing to shed light on the facts; that Prosecutor Durval was the one who claimed that these statements were not germane to the investigation; that the person making the statement signed his testimony under coercion.”176 106. Paulo Sergio Markun also confirmed that the Military Prosecutor had altered his testimony. He stated the following: “during the IPM the witness was asked if he had any reason to suspect that Vladimir Herzog had been tortured; the witness answered yes, because he and his wife were tortured; in response, the Prosecutor told [the witness] that his were subjective allegations and none of those statements appeared in the transcript of his testimony [termo de declarações].” 177 107. Journalist Duque Estrada stated that “[V]ladimir Herzog spoke with an investigator who had a tattoo on his arm in the shape of anchor. The investigator had summoned the witness and Rodolfo Oswaldo 167 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2, Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 1, fls. 118, Parecer do Ministério do Exército en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 26 de mayo de 1976. 168 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2, Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 1, fls. 121, Parecer do Ministério do Exército en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 26 de mayo de 1976. 169 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2, Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 2, fls. 268/270, Despacho saneador en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 16 de marzo de 1978. 170 Tribunal Regional Federal da 3ª Região, Sentencia de los Embargos infringentes No. 89.03.7264-2 del 18 de mayo de 1994. 171 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 2, fls.426/427, Petición de los autores en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 16 de mayo de 1978. 172 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 2, fls.429/430, Petición de los autores en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 16 de mayo de 1978. 173 Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 2, fls.431/452, Audiência de instrução e julgamento en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 16 de mayo de 1978. 174 Los seis testigos que habían declarado fueron: George Benigno Jatahy Duque Estrada, Professor Godofredo da Silva Telles Junior, Harry Shibata, Antony Jorge Andrade de Christo, Paulo Sérgio Markun y Sérgio Gomes da Silva. Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 5, fls. 1002 – Sentencia proferida en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 27 de octubre de 1978. 175 Texto original: “[e]m nenhum local viu o corpo de Vladimir Herzog”. 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. 176 Texto original: “[n]o confirmava o depoimento prestado no inquérito policial militar; que o depoente declarou que havia sido torturado em dependências do DOI CODI; que declarou também ter visto outras pessoas parecendo torturadas; que essas declarações não foram reduzidas a terma sob alegação de que não eram importantes para esclarecimento dos fatos; que o Procurador Doutor Durval foi quem afirmou não ser importantes (sic) essas declarações para apuração dos fatos; […] que o depoente assinou o termo sob coação”. Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 2, fls. 445/446, Declaración de Anthony Christo en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 16 de mayo de 1978. 177 Texto original: “[d]urante o IPM foi perguntado ao depoente se ele tinha razoes para supor que [V]ladimir Herzog tinha sido torturado ao que o depoente afirmou que tinha pelo fato de ter sido torturado bem como sua esposa; ao que o Promotor respondeu que apresentava alegações subjetivas e que nenhuma dessas afirmações constou no termo de declarações”. Proceso No. 2008.61.81.013434-2 Justiça Federal - São Paulo, Volume 2, fls. 448, Declaración de Paulo Markun en la Ação Declaratória No. 136/76, del 16 de mayo de 1978. 24