• Home
• Who Is Lori?
• FAQ
• US Govt Actions
• Perú's Views
•  
• I Want To Help
• Write to Lori
• Mailing List
• Donations
•  
• Family Updates
• In the News
• Chronology
• Lori's Words
•  
• The Committee
• Downloads
• Other Links
•  
• en español

For Immediate Release 12 June 2001

For more information, contact: Gail Taylor 202-548-8480

Trial of Lori Berenson Draws to a Close in Perú

Lima, Perú - On Monday, June 11, defense lawyer José Sandoval presented his closing remarks in Perú in the trial of U.S. citizen Lori Berenson. The court is expected to reconvene to hear final comments from Berenson on Wednesday June 20 at 9 a.m. and a verdict may be announced by thethree-judge panel later that afternoon.

Berenson, 31, was convicted of treason and sentenced to life in prison in a secret proceeding in 1996 by hooded military officers. After serving almost five years in harsh conditions, the Peruvian Supreme Military Council annulled that conviction on August 28, 2000 on the grounds of insufficient evidence. Despite issues of double jeopardy and international judicial and public opinion that Perú's Civilian Terrorism Courts cannot provide a fair trial until reformed, these courts began taking testimony in formal proceedings immediately thereafter. The open court hearings began on March 20, 2001.

Berenson has consistently maintained she is innocent of all charges. In his closing remarks, Mr. Sandoval pointed out that there is no direct evidence whatsoever to lead to a conviction and any circumstantial evidence is totally inadequate to support a conviction. Only the most prejudiced mind could decide otherwise.

Mr. Sandoval reminded the court that much of that circumstantial evidence was presented by Pacifico Castrellon who five years ago decided to cooperate with the Security Police in order to secure a reduced sentence and has commenced a retrial looking for another reduction in sentence. The prosecutor has accused Berenson of belonging to the Peruvian rebel group, the MRTA. But no witness, including Castrellon, has claimed she was a member and no other evidence supports this charge. Although Berenson and Castrellon had rented a house which was subsequently used as a safehouse for this group and where a shootout occurred on November 30, 1995, evidence showed that she moved to an apartment in August 1995, visiting the house only occasionally after that time. Testimony indicated that MRTA members moved into the house and were hidden on the 4th floor after Berenson had moved out. During this trial, no witness testified Berenson was ever on the 4th floor. Those who lived on the 4th floor testified they never saw Berenson until after their arrests. A videotape of this large house showed that the 4th floor was in a different wing, separated from the rooms Berenson visited, and it would have been unlikely that she would have known of their whereabouts. She was not in the house during the shootout. Sandoval also observed that there was no evidence that Berenson knew anything about any MRTA plans to seize the Peruvian Congress. As a freelance journalist, Berenson attended sessions of Congress and sat in the press gallery. She had interviewed members of Congress in their offices, not in the Congress itself, and members confirmed the professional nature of the interviews. Castrellon testified that he knew nothing to connect Berenson to any MRTA plans concerning the Congress and that even though he was building a model of the Congress which he never mentioned to her, she never provided him with any information.

After the closing remarks, Berenson's father Mark said, The failure of the prosecutor to present evidence to support his charges requires an acquittal. This Fujimori-Montesinos persecution must end. He cited the Peruvian Penal Code which states that doubt must favor the accused and that when evidence is not sufficient to establish guilt, the judges must acquit.