Operation Massacre(67)

            And yet, the report was already a fact. What he alleged there could have been entirely false or not, but it was a fact: a man who said he had been executed in an unusual and illegal fashion was appearing before the reviewing judge to charge “whoever was responsible” with attempted homicide and assault.

            There was something else. The document made mention of a second survivor, a certain Giunta, which opened up the immediate possibility of checking the facts that had already been reported. We were already quite far away from that first rumor overheard in a café thirty-six hours earlier.

            That same afternoon the copy of the report landed in the hands of Mr. Leónidas Barletta, who ran Propósitos. Barletta spoke little and promised nothing. He only asked whether the circulation of this text might not disrupt the ongoing legal investigation. He received a reply stating that the most pressing concern was to use the right kind of publicity to protect the plaintiff’s life, Doglia’s life, and the lives of other witnesses who were thought to be in danger. Three days later, on the night of December 23, the report was out in the streets, brought there by Propósitos.

            In the meantime, on the twenty-first, I had my first encounter with Livraga in his lawyer von Kotsch’s study. I talked to him for a long while, gathering information that I would later use for the story that came out in Revolución Nacional.

            What I first noticed about Livraga, naturally, were the two bullet wound scars on his face (entry and exit wounds). This was also a fact. The circumstances under which he received these injuries could be discussed, but the fact that he had received them could not. Nonetheless, there was an official version that went so far as to claim, absurdly, that “no shots of any kind had been fired on him.”

            What also came to mind immediately was the fundamental question of Livraga’s innocence or guilt vis-à-vis the June 9 uprising. If he had been guilty, even in his intentions, was it normal, psychologically speaking, for him to appear before the judges and demand compensation? Wouldn’t it have made much more sense for him to keep quiet, to thank God for making it out alive and gaining back his freedom? I believe a man has to feel innocent in order to present such a report against a Power as great as the Police Department of the Province. Of course, one could argue that everything is possible in abnormal psychology. But if there is something remarkable about Livraga, it is how normal he is and how reserved, how able he is to reason and observe.

            Moreover, as I have already said, he was set free. This was also a fact. How could they let someone who was directly involved in the June incidents, a “revolutionary,” an executed man, be free? The only explanation was the innocence hypothesis. We were already getting further and further away from the “serialized novel,” which would from now on be perpetuated solely in official versions of the story.

            I won’t say here how the skein came untangled; how, starting with the first thread, we were able to stitch together a nearly definitive overview of what happened; how, starting from just one character in the drama, we were able to find almost all the rest. I would rather share the results we have obtained.

            Over the course of the four months that this search has already lasted, I have spoken with the three survivors of the tragedy who are still at large in the country. I was the first journalist to reach all of them. I found and interviewed the third one even before anyone in the justice system did. I have figured out the names of three more survivors who are now in Bolivia, and the name of a seventh who is locked up in Olmos. I have stated and proven that a man who was recorded as dead in the official list of those executed (Reinaldo Benavídez), whose death certificate even exists, is perfectly safe and unharmed. Inversely, I was sorry to ascertain that another man (Mario Brión), who did not appear on that list and whom I harbored the hope of finding alive at one point, was killed by the firing squad.

            I have spoken to witnesses who were there at every one of the stages that ended in the massacre. Some of the physical evidence in my possession has not yet reached its rightful recipient. I have obtained stenographic transcriptions of the Province Advisory Board’s secret sessions in which the issue was discussed. I have spoken to the families of the victims and I have cultivated direct or indirect relationships with conspirators, political refugees and fugitives, alleged informers, and anonymous heroes. I can also say with confidence that I have always taken the greatest precautions to protect my informants, insofar as my obligation as a journalist has allowed. Throughout this entire process, I have benefited from the invaluable help of the person to whom this book is dedicated.