jueves, 19 de abril de 2012

ADRIANA SARMIENTO ENRÍQUEZ, FEMALE MURDERED IN CIUDAD JUÁREZ.



CIUDAD JUÁREZ SITUATION

Ciudad Juárez (Chihuahua, Mexico) is a city with more than 2 million inhabitants, the fourth biggest city in Mexico. Marginalization, poverty, danger, drug and human traffic or violence against women, are some of the difficulties that the Juarenses have to face everyday.

In 1993 the United States, Canada and Mexico signed the North America Free Trade Agreement, which meant the beginning of female murders and disappearances. The profile of women is: young (from 11-22 years old in the 72% of the cases), attractive and assembly plants employees. Foreign companies installed in Ciudad Juárez their assembly plants (automobile, electronics and medicine products). The most part of the employees were women, because they generated less labor conflicts. They earn about 4$ a day and sexual harassment is present in their jobs by men with higher jobs.



ADRIANA SARMIENTO ENRÍQUEZ

Adriana, the day she disappeared.
Adriana, a 15 year-old student, disappeared on January 2008. She went to a friends house, who took her to the bus which was supposed to take her home. The bus stopped very near her house. Adriana's mother, Ernestia Enríquez, phoned her and listened music, so she supposed that Adriana went out to dance with her friends. That was the last time they know something about her. The FGE found Adriana's mortal remains in November 2009, when they knew the identity they were given to her family. The investigation aimed that she disappeared in the center of the city, where the most part of kidnappings took place.





External links


http://javierjuarez.blogspot.es/1256383080/
http://www.zonafranca.mx/identifican-los-restos-de-adriana-sarmiento-enriquez-estudiante-desaparecida-en-ciudad-juarez-en-2008/

lunes, 27 de febrero de 2012

EL DESCUARTIZADOR DE CÁDIZ

Tras dos semanas de minuciosa preparación, Juan Martín Montañés apuñaló y posteriormente descuartizó a su amigo Javier Suárez Samaniego.

Javier Suárez Samaniego, hijo del arquitecto gaditano José Luis Suárez Cantero, era un joven inteligente y tímido. Estudiaba empresariales en la Universidad de Cádiz y tenía un buen amigo del instituto de Cortadura, Juan Martín Montañés, al que visitaba con frecuencia. 

Juan era un hombre culto, de manos huesudas, aficionado a la lectura de textos religiosos, con conocimientos de derecho y estudiante de Medicina. Poseía un coeficiente intelectual superior a la media. Hijo de un subinspector de policía jubilado, decidió emanciparse pero continuaba dependiendo económicamente de sus padres. Vivía en un bloque de viviendas de verano en la calle Villa de Paradas (Cádiz). Según la policía su apartamento tenía pocos muebles, no estaba muy ordenado, tenía muchas hojas con poesías y reflexiones sobre la vida y la muerte, equipos de música... Todo era normal, excepto el bote con las manos de su amigo Javier en formol que encontraron en la vivienda.

DÍA DE LOS HECHOS (21/01/1989)

A las cuatro y media de la tarde Javier salió de casa a dar un paseo en bici y se encontró con Juan. Éste le dijo que le acompañara a montar una mesa de ping-pong que acababa de comprar y Javier aceptó. Ambos fueron al apartamento y una vez allí Juan le propuso realizar una prueba acústica de un equipo de música. Para ello debería sentarse en una silla con los ojos tapados. En ese momento Juan cogió la pata metálica de una mesa que había rellenado con arena y le golpeó la cabeza. Javier cayó al suelo pero todavía seguía vivo. Dados sus conocimientos de medicina, le clavó un cuchillo entre la tercera y la cuarta costilla, con intención de llegar al corazón. Tras otro segundo intento fallido, le acuchilló varias veces hasta romper el arma. Una vez muerto, le tapó la cabeza con una bolsa de plástico y lo metió en la bañera, donde empezaría la “operación de su vida”. 

Tras limpiarse la sangre, Juan se sentó a escribir una carta a los padres de Javier en la que les pedía 12 millones de pesetas. Deberían ingresarle en una caja de ahorros medio millón cada semana si querían que su hijo siguiera vivo. Si incumplían recibirían un dedo cada semana. 
Tras enviar la carta, troceó el cuerpo de su amigo y guardó sus manos en frascos de formol para enviárselos a la familia si el dinero no era ingresado. 

PUNTA DE SAN FELIPE (22/01/1989)

Simulando que hacía deporte, Juan hizo tres viajes a la Punta de San Felipe, situado en el puerto. En una mochila llevaba los restos de Javier. Los echó al agua de la laguna con la esperanza de que los escombros cubrirían las bolsas con el cadáver. El padre de Javier puso una denuncia y en la lista de sospechosos que elaboró no constaba su amigo Juan, al que la familia apreciaba y consideraba el mejor amigo de Javier.

DOS DÍAS DESPUÉS (23/01/1989)

La bicicleta de Javier apareció a las afueras de la ciudad. El padre de Javier ingresó el dinero indicado en la cuenta corriente de la caja de ahorros tal y como el secuestrador le había indicado.

EL DÍA DEL ARRESTO (30/01/1989)

Después de once días Juan hizo tres extracciones en distintos cajeros. La tercera de ellas fue a las 10.30 del lunes. Tras introducir la tarjeta en una entidad bancaria de la Plaza de San Antonio, fue detenido. El asesino asumió fríamente que había matado a su amigo en el momento de la detención. En el registro de su domicilio encontraron manchas de sangre en las paredes y una fiambrera con formol, dentro de ella estaban las manos de Javier. 

APARICIÓN DEL CADÁVER (31/01/1989) 
Los submarinistas de la Guardia Civil, tras nueve horas de búsqueda, encontraron al día siguiente de la detención las cinco bolsas que contenían distintas partes del cuerpo de Javier. El propio asesino reconoció en el interrogatorio que había depositado allí el cuerpo. Los restos se encontraban a seis metros de profundidad.

EL DESENLACE
       
Los motivos que llevaron a Juan a asesinar a su amigo no se llegaron a averiguar, para algunos su objetivo era conseguir el dinero. De hecho, no era la primera vez que enviaba cartas amenazantes. También lo había hecho con el dueño de un supermercado situado cerca de la casa de sus padres. Su botín fue de 35.000 pesetas, pero esto solo era el principio de su operación. 
Durante el interrogatorio, Juan hablaba sin parar del destino. Para él todo había sido cosa del destino, no había hecho nada por esconderse, el destino había llevado a los policías hasta él. No hubo ningún tipo de arrepentimiento, se mostraba frío en todo momento. Según el informe, Juan fue descrito como una persona con “personalidad narcista, afán de notoriedad y egocentrismo” al mismo tiempo que hablaba de una posible homosexualidad no reconocida. Más tarde se supo a través de  sus compañeros que le gustaba diseccionar animales. El único motivo por el que sentía la más mínima sensibilidad era por el daño causado a sus padres. 
Le condenaron a 36 años de cárcel y no ha cumplido ni la mitad de esa condena. El 21 de junio de 2004 salió de la prisión Madrid 6, situada en Aranjuez. La sentencia asignaba 28 años por el asesinado, cuatro por falsificación de documentos y cuatro por amenazas. En 1992 se llevó a cabo una primera proyección de su caso que estimaba que saldría de la cárcel en el año 2025, es decir, con 57 años. La proyección del año 1996 estimaba que sería en 2007. Finalmente fue antes de lo pensado. Pese a estar en libertad, no puede entrar en la ciudad de Cádiz. La sentencia ha sido reducida por buen comportamiento y la realización de trabajos para la comunidad. Además, en los 15 años y seis meses que estuvo en prisión se sacó dos carreras.

EMBEDDED AND INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM IN IRAQ



Definition of “Embedded Journalism”.

Embedded journalism is a practice in which journalists cover a war with military units. This concept began to be used in the invasion of Iraq (2003). At the beginning of the war there were about 775 embedded journalists, but at the end of the year were about 100. In 2005, there were just 48 embedded reporters in Iraq. The reason was media desire to reduce their stuff in Iraq for financial reasons. They had to sign a contract with the military. The only apparent restrictions that they had was not to report information about the unit position, future missions, classified weapons or something that they could find. Anyway, if there was something that the military wanted to hide, they could not publish it. Moreover, if there is something that they don’t want journalists to know, they just try to hide it from journalists. If the commander of an embedded journalist declares a “blackout” they can’t fill stories via satellite connection. In this way, the military can create their own story about the war and that story is transmitted to the audience. They can pull credentials from journalists if the don’t respect the contract, it happened in Kuwait with two journalists who published an illustration of the military control over embedded journalists. 

Advantages and disadvantages.

It can be used as propaganda. Reporters are away from civilian populations and spend the day with the invading forces, so if they protect them and even sleep with them, they won’t be objective. This is a dangerous practice because journalists are at the same risk than militaries, 85 journalists have been killed in Iraq. The fact that journalists travel, live and report with the military was an advance. In previous conflicts the access wasn’t allowed. Stories reported by embedded journalists are very real, they give a sense of immediacy and humanity. Relationships between the military and journalists have been uneasy because of their different aims. 

“Embedded in Iraq” (Gavin Hewitt) and “Bagdag, city of walls” (Ghait Abdul-Ahad)

Gavin Hewitt is a British journalist and presenter from the BBC. Since 2009 he is the BBC New’s Europe Editor. In his article “Embedded in Iraq” he explains how he covered the Iraq war with the military. Reporters were trained in the front line, in Quantico, about useful things in Iraq (how women could use ponchos, cotton underwear, maps, military grids... They were allowed by the 3rd Infantry Division to bring their own vehicle, a Land Rover Discovery with the equipment. He was with a cameraman (Peter Gigliotti) and a driver (Jimmy Grant). As he explains, Iraqis went out to see them, and thought that “Americans were liberators”. They were shelled as well as military. They could see military soldiers and civilians death. First Hewitt told the cameraman to avoid the details, but he regretted that. He finishes his article saying: “This was liberation day, bight shining but strangely incomplete. There was a celebration but also silence”. 
Ghaith Abdul-Ahad is an Iraqi journalist who has worked in The Guardian and the Washington Post. He has reported from Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan and Libya. He had to change constantly his residence because he was a deserter from Saddam Hussein’s army. He was a freelance photographer and journalist for Getty Images and for The Guardian after the invasion or Iraq (2003). He covered the front lines of Sunni and Shia and wrote the book “Unembedded: Four Independent Photojournalists on the War in Iraq”. 

The main difference between Gavin and Ghaith is that one covered the invasion of Iraq from a military point of view and other from the civil one. “Embedded in Iraq” just shows how Americans are liberators for Iraqis. But Ghaith’s film shows that Iraqis are uncomfortable with the American presence and would like to solve the conflict on their own. In the embedded coverage there is a lack of objectivity because journalists are part of U.S. Forces, they spend the day with them and just see what they want them to see. But a freelance journalist, such as Ghaith Abdul-Ahad shows how Iraqis see the invasion and how do the military act by killing their family or friends.



Embedded in Iraq. Gavin Hewitt.

Baghdad, city of walls. Ghaith Abdul-Ahad.



lunes, 13 de febrero de 2012

WAR COVERAGE EVOLUTION



War coverage has always been a dangerous task. War correspondents have risked their lives with a common aim: providing the best information to their audience. Media coverage has evolved as well as technology. Technological developments are strictly related with the way that information has been transmitted in different wars. 

The civil war coverage created a big demand, newspapers such as the New York Herald spent 1$million. About 500 correspondents were covering the North and 100 were in the South. Censorship has characterized several conflicts, in this period were created the “press pass” and the “press release”. The technology used by journalists was mainly the telegraph and also photography. But pictures had to be sent and arrived late to their destination. 

In the World War I there was laws which restricted the press: The Espionage Act (journalists can’t publish useful information for the enemy) and the Sedition Act (disloyal language about the US Government is banned). The Committee on Public Information (CPI) was the first US propaganda office and also limited press freedom. Technology had evolve from the Civil War: film cameras, motion-picture, telegraph and wireless telegraph and trans-Atlantic cable from England... But censorship controlled everything. 

The Espionage Act and Trading with the Enemy Act from World War I were still effective in the World War II. Franklin D. Roosevelt created the Office of War Information (OWI) and the Office of Censorship. Journalists were given some instructions through the “Code of Wartime Practices for the American Press”.

During the Korean War, there was a self-censorship policy for the press, they could write but could be punished. Broadcasting began to evolve but radio was still the first source for the audience. It was the last US conflict of printed press and radio dominance. 

Like there was no declaration of war and then, no legal basis for the Vietnam War, journalists were asked to practice a voluntary censorship. Media were controlled by the Wartime Information Security Program (1971). The Vietnam War was also called “the living room war” because of the evolution of broadcasting. Satellites were still in their infancy.

The Gulf War was characterized by the military control of the press access by using the Pool System (a group of journalists cover an event for the rest). Ted Turner created in 1980 the CNN, which emitted 24 hours a day the Persian Gulf War. The information arrived everywhere and rapidly through satellites video transmission. 

Correspondents were forced to leave Kosovo when the war started by the government and NATO forces were a questionable source of information. As far as technology is concerned: satellite cell phone allowed an express sent, satellite uplinks sent videos directly to newsrooms and digital video and cameras as well as the Internet made possible the transmission of images, videos and information rapidly. Media were very powerful and it worried the government, as Philip J. Crowley (US Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs) said: “You have to plan your media strategy
with as much attention as you plan your military strategy”.