Former Salvadoran army officers convicted in 1982 killing of 4 Dutch TV journalists
Three former Salvadoran military officers were convicted by a five-person jury late Tuesday for the 1982 killings of four Dutch journalists during the Central American nation's civil war. They received 15-year prison sentences.
A jury made up of five women convicted the three men of murder in a lightning trial that began Tuesday morning in the northern city of Chalatenango, said Oscar Pérez, lawyer for the Foundation Comunicandonos that represented the victims' families. Pérez said prosecutors had requested minimum 15-year prison sentences for all three.
Convicted were former Defense Minister Gen. José Guillermo García, 91, former treasury police director Col. Francisco Morán, 93, and Col. Mario Adalberto Reyes Mena, 85, who was the former army commander of the Fourth Infantry Brigade in Chalatenango.
García and Morán are under police guard at a private hospital in San Salvador, while Reyes Mena lives in the United States. In March, El Salvador's Supreme Court ordered that the extradition process be started to bring him back.
Pérez said that in addition to the convictions of the former high-ranking officers, the judge condemned the government for the delayed justice and ordered the commander in chief of the armed forces, President Nayib Bukele, to issue a public apology to the victims.
In this March 11, 1982 photo, from left, Jan Kuiper, director; Koos Koster, producer; Joop Willemsen, cameraman; and Hans ter Laag, soundman; walk north of San Salvador, El Salvador, days before they were killed.
AP Photo, File)
The Dutch TV journalists - Jan Kuiper, Koos Koster, Hans ter Laag and Joop Willemson - had linked up with leftist rebels and planned to spend several days behind rebel lines reporting. But Salvadoran soldiers armed with assault rifles and machine guns ambushed them and the guerrillas.
García was deported from the U.S. in 2016, after a U.S. judge declared him responsible for serious human rights violations during the early years of the war between the military and the leftist Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front guerrillas.
The prosecution of the men was reopened in 2018 after the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a general amnesty passed following the 1980-1992 war.
It moved slowly, but in March 2022, relatives of the victims and representatives of the Dutch government and European Union demanded that those responsible for killing Jan Kuiper, Koos Koster, Hans ter Laag and Joop Willemson be tried.
Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp welcomed the convictions.
"This is an important moment in the fight against impunity and in the pursuit of justice for the four Dutch journalists and their next of kin," Veldkamp said in a message on social media.
"Grateful to the authorities of El Salvador and to all those who have worked tirelessly on this case," he added.
According to Foundation Comunicandonos, Jan Kuiper died just two days before his 40th birthday and his colleague Hans ter Laag wrote a letter to his girlfriend shortly before the fatal trip, saying: "My dear, this Wednesday the guerrillas will take us to the liberated zone. We are going to Chalatenango, where the armed struggle is taking place. It is a very dangerous trip and must be secret."
Koos Koster studied theology in college and published several books about international politics, Foundation Comunicandonos said. The tombstone at his graveside features an image, made by his sister, depicting a biblical story and next to it the motto: "Survival compels."
Joop Willensen planned to marry his longtime partner, Yata Matsuzaki, in Mexico after his trip to El Salvador, she said.
The United Nations Truth Commission for El Salvador, which was set up as part of a U.N.-brokered peace agreement in 1992, concluded there was clear evidence that the killings were the result of an ambush set up by Reyes Mena with the knowledge of other officials, based on an intelligence report that alerted of the journalists' presence.
Other members of the military, including Gen. Rafael Flores Lima and Sgt. Mario Canizales Espinoza were also accused of involvement, but died. Canizales allegedly led the patrol that carried out the massacre of the journalists.
Former Defense Minister Jose Guillermo Garcia is surrounded by press as he arrives at the Oscar Arnulfo Romero international airport in San Luis Talpa, El Salvador, Jan. 8, 2016.
Salvador Melendez / AP
Juan Carlos Sánchez, of the nongovernmental organization Mesa Contra la Impunidad, in comments to journalists, called the trial a "transcendental step that the victims have waited 40 years for."
An estimated 75,000 civilians were killed during El Salvador's civil war, mostly by U.S.-backed government security forces.
The trial was closed to the public.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Religion cases spark both unanimity and division at Supreme Court
Religious rights are sparking both unanimity and deep divisions on the Supreme Court this term, with one major decision still to come. On Thursday, all nine justices sided with Catholic Charities Bureau in its tax fight with Wisconsin. But weeks earlier, the court's 4-4 deadlock handed those same religious interests a loss by refusing to greenlight the nation's first religious charter school. Now, advocates are turning their attention to the other major religion case still pending this term, which concerns whether parents have the First Amendment right to opt-out their children from instruction including books with LGBTQ themes. 'The court has been using its Religion Clause cases over the past few years to send the message that everything doesn't have to be quite so polarized and quite so everybody at each other's throats,' said Mark Rienzi, the president and CEO of Becket, a religious legal group that represents both the parents and Catholic Charities. The trio of cases reflect a new burst of activity on the Supreme Court's religion docket, a major legacy of Chief Justice John Roberts' tenure. Research by Lee Epstein, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis, found the Roberts Court has ruled in favor of religious organizations over 83 percent of the time, a significant jump from previous eras. The decisions have oftentimes protected Christian traditions, a development that critics view as a rightward shift away from a focus on protecting non-mainstream religions. But on Thursday, the court emerged unanimous. The nine justices all agreed that Wisconsin violated the First Amendment in denying Catholic Charities a religious exemption from paying state unemployment taxes. Wisconsin's top court denied the exemption by finding the charity wasn't primarily religious, saying it could only qualify if it was trying to proselytize people. Catholic Charities stressed that the Catholic faith forbids misusing works of charity for proselytism. Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored Thursday's majority opinion finding Wisconsin unconstitutionally established a government preference for some religious denominations over others. 'There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one,' Sotomayor wrote. The fact that Sotomayor, one of the court's three Democratic-appointed justices, wrote the opinion heightened the sense of unity. 'She's voted with us in several other cases, too, and I think it just shows that it is not the partisan issue that people sometimes try to make it out to be,' said Rienzi. However, Sotomayor's opinion notably did not address Catholic Charities' other arguments, including those related to church autonomy that Justice Clarence Thomas, one the court's leading conservatives, endorsed in a solo, separate opinion. Ryan Gardner, senior counsel at First Liberty Institute, which filed a brief backing Catholic Charities, similarly called the unanimity an 'encouraging' sign. 'If they can find a way to do that, they want to do that. And that's why I think you have the opinion written the way that it was. It was written that way so that every justice could feel comfortable signing off on it,' said Gardner. Supporters and critics of the court's decision agree it still poses repercussions on cases well beyond the tax context — and even into the culture wars. Perhaps most immediately, the battle at the Supreme Court will shift from unemployment taxes to abortion. The justices have a pending request from religious groups, also represented by Becket, to review New York's mandate that employers' health care plans cover abortions. The regulation exempts religious organizations only if they inculcate religious values, meaning many faith-based charities must still follow the mandate. And for the First Liberty Institute, it believes Thursday's decision bolsters its legal fights in the lower courts. It represents an Ohio church that serves the homeless and an Arizona church that provides food distribution, both embroiled in legal battles with local municipalities that implicate whether the ministries are religious enough. Thursday's decision is not the first time the Supreme Court has unanimously handed a win to religious rights advocates. In 2023, the First Liberty Institute successfully represented a Christian U.S. Postal Service worker who requested a religious accommodation to not work on Sundays. And two years earlier, the court in a unanimous judgment ruled Philadelphia violated the Free Exercise Clause by refusing to refer children to a Catholic adoption agency because it would not certify same-sex couples to be foster parents. 'People thought that was a very narrow decision at the time, but the way it has sort of been applied since then, it has really reshaped a lot of the way that we think about Free Exercise cases,' said Gardner. It's not always kumbaya, however. Last month, the Supreme Court split evenly on a highly anticipated religious case that concerned whether Oklahoma could establish the nation's first publicly funded religious charter school. The 4-4 deadlock meant the effort fizzled. Released just three weeks after the justices' initial vote behind closed doors, the decision spanned one sentence. 'The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court,' it reads. Though the deadlock means supporters of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School are left without a green light, they are hoping they will prevail soon enough. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump's third appointee to the court, recused from the St. Isidore case, which many court watchers believe stemmed from her friendship with a professor at Notre Dame, whose religious liberty clinic represented St. Isidore. But Barrett could participate in a future case — providing the crucial fifth vote — that presents the same legal question, which poses consequential implications for public education. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court still has one major religion case left this term. The justices are reviewing whether Montgomery County, Md., must provide parents an option to opt-out their elementary-aged children from instruction with books that include LGBTQ themes. The group of Muslim, Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox parents suing say it substantially burdens their First Amendment rights under the Free Exercise Clause. At oral arguments, the conservative majority appeared sympathetic with the parent's plea as the court's three liberal justices raised concerns about where to draw the line. 'Probably, it will be a split decision,' said Gardner, whose group has filed a similar lawsuit on behalf of parents in California. But he cautioned, 'you never know where some of the justices will line up.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Utah killer with dementia is competent enough for death sentence to be carried out, judge rules
A convicted killer in Utah who developed dementia during his time on death row is competent enough to be executed, a state judge ruled on Friday. Ralph Leroy Menzies, 67, was found guilty and sentenced to death in March 1988 for the 1986 killing of Maurine Hunsaker, a 26-year-old mother of three. Judge Matthew Bates said Menzies "consistently and rationally understands" what is happening and why he is facing execution, despite his recent cognitive decline. "Menzies has not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that his understanding of his specific crime and punishment has fluctuated or declined in a way that offends the Eighth Amendment," which prohibits cruel and unusual punishments, Bates said in his court order. Suspect Charged With Murdering Israeli Embassy Staff Could Face Death Penalty Menzies selected the firing squad as his method of execution and will become only the sixth U.S. prisoner executed by firing squad since 1977 — three in Utah, with the last one in the state carried out in 2010, and two in South Carolina this year. Read On The Fox News App The Utah Attorney General's Office is expected to file a death warrant soon. Menzies' lawyers had argued their client's dementia was so severe that he could not understand why he was being put to death, adding that they plan to appeal Friday's ruling to the state Supreme Court. Cop Killer Dies After 'Botched' Execution; Witness In The Room Reveals How It Happened "Ralph Menzies is a severely brain-damaged, wheelchair-bound, 67-year-old man with dementia and significant memory problems," his attorney, Lindsey Layer, said in a statement. "It is deeply troubling that Utah plans to remove Mr. Menzies from his wheelchair and oxygen tank to strap him into an execution chair and shoot him to death." The U.S. Supreme Court has previously spared death row inmates with dementia from execution, including an Alabama man in 2019 who was convicted of killing a police officer. Since his sentencing 37 years ago, Menzies' attorneys have filed multiple appeals that delayed his death sentence, which had been scheduled at least twice before it was postponed. Menzies had abducted Hunsaker in February 1986 from the convenience store where she worked, just three days after he was released on bail over an unrelated crime. Hunsaker was later found strangled with her throat cut at a picnic area in the Wasatch Mountains of northern Utah. When he was later jailed on unrelated matters, Menzies had Hunsaker's wallet and several other items that belonged to her. He was convicted of first-degree murder and other crimes. Matt Hunsaker, who was 10 years old when his mother was killed, said Friday that his family is overwhelmed with emotion to know that justice will finally be served. The Associated Press contributed to this article source: Utah killer with dementia is competent enough for death sentence to be carried out, judge rules
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jesse Watters Trots Out Dehumanizing Analogy for Kilmar Abrego Garcia's Return
Fox News host Jesse Watters criticized the Trump administration for bringing Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the United States, saying the wrongly deported man's return was like taking a rental car to the car wash. 'I don't think they should have brought him back,' Watters said on The Five, shortly after news broke that Abrego Garcia is facing two counts of human smuggling in Tennessee. 'This is a national security situation. The guy is a designated terrorist. He belongs somewhere else. What are we going to do? We're going to spend two years and $50 million trying this guy and imprisoning this guy, feeding him, giving him healthcare, and then flying him home?' Watters said incredulously. 'This is like renting a car and taking it to a car wash before you return it,' he added. 'What's the point? It's not your car, and it's going back anyway.' Attorney General Pam Bondi said Abrego Garcia would first serve time in a U.S. prison if convicted, then be removed from the country once again. Garcia had been held in El Salvador's Terrorism Confinement Center even after the Trump administration admitted his deportation was an 'administrative error.' When the Supreme Court ordered that it 'facilitate' his return, the White House insisted that it was powerless to do so. Friday's events proved the administration was lying, The Five co-host Jessica Tarlov said Friday. '[White House Press Secretary] Karoline Leavitt—as well as other members of the administration, from the president himself to Kristi Noem—lied to the American people when they said they couldn't bring him back,' Tarlov said. 'Well, I guess you could get him back.' Andrew Rossman, a lawyer for Abrego Garcia, made the same point. 'Today's action proves what we've known all along—that the administration had the ability to bring him back and just refused to do so,' he told The New York Times. 'It's now up to our judicial system to see that Mr. Abrego Garcia receives the due process that the Constitution guarantees to all persons.' Abrego Garcia was sent to Tennessee, where the indictment was filed in May and unsealed Friday. The Times reports that an imprisoned man's information about Abrego Garcia moved the case forward. Prosecutors couldn't agree how to proceed, however, and one ended up resigning.
