ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM
FROM:

Scott R. Lassar
Michael P. Doss

RE:

Guevara Investigation – Gabriel Solache and Arturo Reyes

DATE:

December 12, 2014

I.

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

We were retained by the City of Chicago to investigate allegations of misconduct made
against former Police Detective Reynaldo Guevara and to evaluate whether the alleged
misconduct resulted in convictions of innocent people currently serving prison sentences. This
Memorandum summarizes our conclusions from the investigation of such allegations made by
defendants Gabriel Solache and Arturo Reyes, who are currently serving life sentences.
Solache and Reyes were convicted (along with co-defendant Adriana Mejia) for the 1998
murders of Jacinta and Mariano Soto and the kidnapping of the Soto children, three year-old
Santiago and two month-old Maria. Both Solache and Reyes claim innocence and allege that
their signed confessions to these murders were coerced by physical abuse by Detective Guevara.
In the course of our investigation, we have (i) conducted 10 interviews, including of
Solache and Reyes and their counsel, Adriana Mejia, Rosauro Mejia, Horatio Mejia, ViolaRouse Armijo, Ernest Halvorsen, and counsel for the City; (ii) reviewed transcripts and court
filings of pre-trial, trial, and post-conviction proceedings; and (iii) reviewed police and forensic
reports made available to us that document the investigation of the crimes at issue.
Detective Guevara and Youth Officer Daniel Trevino declined to be interviewed by
Sidley.1
As explained in further detail below, we have come to the following conclusions based
on our investigation:
(i) First, we find it more likely than not that Solache and Reyes were physically abused
by Detective Guevara and were otherwise subjected to unreasonable treatment during the course
of their interrogations.

1

In our analysis of the facts and conclusions we did not draw any negative inference arising from Guevara’s and
Trevino’s decisions to decline our interview requests.

 (ii) Second, despite the abusive conduct during the course of their interrogations, we
nevertheless reject both Solache’s and Reyes’ claims of actual innocence, noting in particular
that Adriana Mejia continues to identify both of them as involved with her in the murders.
II.

BACKGROUND FACTS
Unless otherwise indicated, the following background facts are undisputed.
A.

Solache and Reyes Convictions and Legal Proceedings.

On June 20, 2000, Gabriel Solache and Arturo de Leon Reyes2 were each convicted of
two counts of murder, two counts of aggravated kidnapping, and one count of home invasion.
Reyes was sentenced to life in prison, and Solache was sentenced to death. Their convictions
were affirmed on appeal. A third co-defendant, Adriana Mejia, pled guilty and is serving a life
sentence.
Both men maintain their innocence. They claim that Detective Guevara physically
abused them and caused them to confess to participating in the crimes. Both have filed postconviction petitions based upon an alleged pattern and practice of misconduct by Detective
Guevara, and the hearings in those proceedings have been ongoing for roughly a year and a half.
B.

Relationship Between Co-Defendants Solache, Reyes, and Mejia.

In 1998, Gabriel Solache, Arturo Reyes, and Adriana Mejia lived together in a house
located at 6234 S. Mozart, Chicago, Illinois. A number of other adults also lived at the same
address—Rosauro Mejia (Adriana’s husband), Carlos Martinez (Adriana’s brother), Jorge Mejia
(Rosauro’s brother), and Jorge Mejia’s wife Guadalupe Mejia. Carlos Martinez and Gabriel
Solache shared a bedroom, while Arturo Reyes had his own room. All of the adult members of
the household had immigrated to the United States from Mexico.
Solache is Adriana Mejia’s cousin and they are from the same small town in Mexico.
Rosauro Mejia also knew Solache from their youth in Mexico—they used to play basketball
together. Solache moved into the Mozart address in September 1996. Initially, he lived in the
basement apartment with Jorge and Guadalupe Mejia, but at some point, he moved up to the first
floor where Rosauro and Adriana Mejia and Carlos Martinez lived. He states that he paid $100
per month in rent, and $30 per week for food, to either Adriana or to Rosauro.
Arturo Reyes was not related to any of the members of the household. He was, however,
the brother-in-law of one of Rosauro Mejia’s other brothers, Manuel, who lived close by.
Rosauro allowed Reyes to move into the house at 6234 S. Mozart as a favor to Manuel. Reyes
moved into the Mozart address in January 1998, and he states he paid $150 per month in rent to
Rosauro Mejia.

2

Some police records and court filings in this case refer to Arturo as “De Leon,” but most refer to him as “Reyes,”
and for consistency’s sake, we will do so as well.

2

 C.

Solache and Reyes Background.

In March 1998, Solache was working full-time as a machine operator at a metal factory
located at 47th and Cicero. He reports having worked there since the fall of 1997, working five
days a week from approximately 4:30 p.m. to 12:30 a.m. (although occasionally stayed late to
earn overtime). Solache reports previously having worked at a cardboard factory in Franklin
Park, which he lost following a non-job accident and hospitalization in the summery of 1997.
Before the instant offenses, Solache had no criminal record in Mexico or in the United States.
He also has no record of any gang-related activities.
In March 1998, Reyes was working full-time at the Ed Miniat Meat Packing Company in
South Holland. (Reyes had left his wife and at least one child back in Mexico when he came to
the United States.) He reports having worked there since late January or early February 1998
and working seven days a week from approximately noon to midnight. Before the instant
offenses, Reyes had no criminal record in Mexico or in the United States. He also has no record
of in any gang-related activities.
D.

The Crime.

At some point in mid-1997, Adriana Mejia began perpetuating the lie that she was
pregnant. In fact, she was unable to conceive. But she told her husband, her housemates, and
her extended family that she was pregnant and due in mid-March 1998. No one, not even her
husband, reports having learned that she had been faking her pregnancy until after she was
arrested. (As discussed further below, in our interview Adriana Mejia stated that she told Solache
about her fake pregnancy but no one else.)
On the morning of Friday, March 27, 1998, Adriana asked her husband Rosauro to take
her to the University of Illinois-Chicago clinic where she had been pretending to receive prenatal
care. She told Rosauro that she was going to be induced. Adriana told him not to stay, and
Rosauro went to work that day. At some point later that day, Adriana called Rosauro to tell him
that she had had a baby girl and that he should pick her up at the hospital the following morning.
At some point in the early hours of Saturday, March 28, 1998, Adriana went to the
residence of Jacinta and Mariano Soto. The Sotos were the parents of a three year-old boy
named Santiago and a baby girl, approximately two months old, named Maria. Adriana reports
that Reyes and Solache accompanied her to the Soto residence, where the three of them broke
into the basement apartment, stabbed Mariano and Jacinta to death, and kidnapped their two
children. At some point thereafter, Adriana returned to the hospital with both of the Soto
children and later brought them home, presenting the baby as her own and the boy as the son of
someone (Norma Salazar) she had met at the hospital.
Solache and Reyes deny any involvement in the murders and kidnappings.

3

 E.

Activity Between the Crime and Eventual Confessions.

On the morning of Saturday, March 28, 1998, Rosauro Mejia and Guadalupe Mejia (the
wife of Rosauro’s brother) went to the hospital to pick up Adriana and the child they thought was
the newborn baby of Adriana and Rosauro. Rosauro reports being surprised to find Adriana also
had a young boy with her; Adriana told everyone that the boy’s mother, a woman named Norma
Salazar, was having a caesarian section at the hospital and that she had asked Adriana to look
after the boy for a day or so. When Adriana returned to the house that morning, Reyes and
Solache were both home, though they both left shortly thereafter—Reyes to go to work and
Solache to go pick up his paycheck.
During the course of the week that followed, various questions were raised with Adriana
about the three-year-old boy who remained in her care at the house. Adriana gave various
explanations, including telling her husband Rosauro that the boy’s mother had AIDS and could
no longer take care of him.
On the evening of Thursday, April 2, 1998, Guadalupe Mejia saw a news story about the
Soto murders. During the news report, she saw a picture of a little boy that was missing from the
Soto residence, and she recognized him as the same little boy Adriana had brought home from
the hospital. Guadalupe reported confronting Adriana and demanding that she take the little boy
to the police, but Adriana refused.
When Rosauro Mejia returned from work in the early morning hours of Friday, April 3,
1998, Guadalupe told him of the news story, and Rosauro decided that they should take the little
boy to the police station. After some discussion, it ultimately was decided that Rosauro,
Solache, and Reyes would together take the boy to the local police station. When they arrived,
the three men were told to wait until they could speak with a Spanish-speaking officer.
Eventually, Officer Juan Solis arrived to speak with them, and Rosauro explained how his wife
had come home from the hospital with the little boy, that the boy’s mother, Norma Salazar, was
unable to care for him, and that they brought him to the police when they realized that he was
missing. The police later confirmed the identity of the boy as Santiago Soto.
That same morning, April 3, 1998, the police went to the residence at 6234 S. Mozart to
speak with Adriana Mejia. According to police reports, she willingly let the police into the home
and showed them the baby. Adriana was arrested and taken to the Area 5 police headquarters at
Grand and Central. At some point during the afternoon of Friday, April 3, 1998, the police also
moved Rosauro, Solache, and Reyes to Area 5 headquarters.
The nature of the interrogations that followed are subject to dispute and are discussed in
greater detail below. It is undisputed, however, that Adriana, Rosauro, Solache, and Reyes were
held at Area 5 and interrogated about their involvement in the Soto murders during the period
from the afternoon of Friday, April 3rd until the early morning hours of Sunday, April 5th.
According to police reports, Adriana initially told the police that the little boy belonged
to Norma Salazar, a woman at the hospital who asked Adriana for help. Later, during a

4

 polygraph exam, Adriana said that she needed a baby because she couldn’t tell her husband she
was not actually pregnant, and she had purchased the children from Norma Salazar for $600; she
failed the exam.
Adriana eventually confessed to having participated in the murders after she was
presented with a pair of her shoes seized from her residence that had blood stains on them.3
According to police reports, Adriana initially stated that she had paid Arturo Reyes $600 to kill
the Sotos and take their children but did not mention Solache. One police report in fact reported
that Adriana had expressly denied Solache was involved. Police reports further state that Reyes
was the next to confess, on the afternoon of Saturday, April 4, 1998, while being interrogated by
Detective Guevara, and in the course of doing so, he implicated Solache in the murders. The
reports state that when the police went back to Adriana and told her Reyes had implicated
Solache, then she too stated that Solache participated in the crimes. Police reports also state that
later that evening, while Guevara interviewed him, Solache also confessed to participating in the
murders.
By early Sunday morning, Adriana, Solache, and Reyes had each signed written
statements admitting involvement in the Soto murders. Rosauro Mejia also signed a statement,
in which he denied knowing that his wife was not in fact pregnant and recounted his interactions
with his wife and the kidnapped children she brought home from the hospital. Each written
statement was signed in the presence of an Assistant State’s Attorney (“ASA”).
F.

Police Investigation.

The bodies of Mariano and Jacinta Soto were discovered by police on Wednesday, April
1, 1998 (four days after the murders) after family members of the Sotos reported them missing.
According to police reports, Mariano was found laying face up, five feet from the front door with
multiple stab wounds all over his body. A kitchen knife was found under his right arm. Another
knife was found in a box behind the sofa.
Jacinta Soto was found on the floor in the bedroom. She too had multiple knife wounds,
mostly to the back and buttocks. Blood was splattered on the bedroom wall five feet from her
body.
Police collected a number of pieces of physical evidence from the scene, including:
•
•
•
•

A knife that was in a box behind the couch in the Soto residence;
A knife that was on the ground underneath Mariano Soto;
Physical specimens from both victims including a vial of blood; oral, rectal, and
vaginal swabs; clothing; hair samples; and fingernail clippings;
Blood-stained baby blanket and baby pants.

3

Adriana Mejia was also presented with the jacket Santiago Soto was wearing when he was brought to the police
station, which, according to an April 30, 1998 police report, had blood stains on it. However, subsequent lab reports
concluded that there in fact was no blood found on the jacket.

5

 The bloody sheets from the bedroom were not collected. The latent fingerprints taken
from the crime scene were deemed not suitable for comparison.
The police later twice searched the Mejia residence at 6234 S. Mozart. During the first
search, the police found a pair of Adriana’s shoes which had blood stains on them (which later
DNA tests confirmed was the blood of victim Mariano Soto). Adriana’s shoes also tested
positive for an “additional” DNA type, but the amounts of that profile were too small to be
compared. During the second search, the police recovered a pair of Adriana’s pants that also
had blood on them (also later shown to be Mariano Soto’s blood).
The police also recovered physical evidence from Rosauro Mejia’s car, including:
•
•
•
•
•

The floor mats;
A black cloth scarf;
A bag with a dirty rag that was stored in the trunk wheel well;
A cushion from the rear seat of the car;
A blood-stained green towel from the rear window deck behind the seat.

The green towel seized from Rosauro Meija’s car later tested positive for Adriana
Mejia’s DNA, and also tested positive for DNA belonging to another unidentified male. In
addition, a knife seized at the Soto residence also tested positive for Adriana Mejia’s DNA.
When Solache and Reyes were detained for questioning, the police collected Solache’s
shoes and Reyes’s pants and shoes. No blood or any DNA from the Sotos was found on any of
these items. The police tested the physical evidence seized for DNA comparisons against
Mariano and Jacinta Soto, Adriana Mejia, Solache, and Reyes. No tests were conducted for
comparisons against any of the other residents of 6234 S. Mozart, including Rosauro Mejia,
Carlos Martinez, or Jorge and Guadalupe Mejia.
G.

The Trial and Subsequent Court Proceedings

Adriana Mejia pled guilty while Solache and Reyes were tried together before separate
juries and convicted in June 2000.
The central evidence presented against Solache and Reyes were their written confessions
in which they admitted participating in the murders of Jacinta and Mariano Soto. Adriana Mejia
did not testify; nor was her statement implicating Solache and Reyes otherwise presented to the
jury. Both Solache and Reyes contended their confessions had been coerced. The State put on
witnesses to rebut Solache’s and Reyes’s claims that their confessions were coerced, including
the testimony of Detective Guevara. Beyond the confessions, no other evidence was introduced
to establishing their involvement in the Soto murders.
Rosauro Mejia testified in support of the defendants’ claims of physical abuse. He
testified that when he was being questioned by Guevara, Guevara asked him how much he paid
for the little girl, and when Rosauro answered that he had not paid anything, Guevara hit him
repeatedly. Trial Tr., June 19, 2000, in People v. Solache, et al., Case No. 98-12440, Circuit

6

 Court of Cook County, at Q - 22. Rosauro testified that he believed Guevara hit him because he
did not believe him. Id.
In Detective Guevara’s testimony, he denied hitting, striking, or slapping anyone and said
he never saw Solache or Reyes exhibiting any signs of having been beaten by anyone else. Id. at
Q – 239-40. Detective Guevara further testified that, as far as he knew, neither defendant had
complained of being struck by an officer. Id. at Q – 214-15.
After both Solache and Reyes were found guilty, the court denied their motions for a new
trial. The State sought the death penalty and, at sentencing, Solache and Reyes waived their
right to a jury. The court found sufficient mitigating factors with respect to Reyes to preclude
the death penalty, and he was sentenced to life in prison. Solache, however, was sentenced to
death. On January 10, 2003, while Solache’s appeal to the Supreme Court was pending,
Governor Ryan commuted all death sentences in Illinois to life sentences.
In August and September 2003, the defendants’ convictions were affirmed. The appellate
court4 noted that the case hinged on credibility and that the trial court, best positioned to adjudge
credibility, did not find the defendants credible. Three months later, the defendants filed postconviction petitions, citing new evidence that throughout his career, Detective Guevara had
systematically coerced confessions and witness identifications. In March 2004, the trial court
summarily dismissed both defendants’ petitions as frivolous and patently without merit.
In December 2006, the Illinois appellate court issued an opinion in the consolidated
cases, reversing the trial court’s dismissal of the post-conviction petitions and remanding the
matter for a hearing with directions that it be reassigned to a new trial judge.
In May 2013, Judge Obbish, Cook County Circuit Court, began hearing testimony in the
Solache and Reyes post-conviction hearing. Solache and Reyes have both testified about their
allegations of misconduct at these proceedings. The court has also heard from other witnesses
regarding Guevara’s alleged pattern and practice of misconduct, including Annie Turner, Adrian
Duta, Leshurn Hunt, David Velazquez, Adolfo Frias, Graciela Flores, Samuel Perez, and Bill
Dorsch. Currently, the State is putting on its rebuttal witnesses, and these hearings are still
ongoing.
III.

INVESTIGATION SCOPE AND PROCEDURES
A.

Interviews

Sidley conducted nine interviews in the course of its investigation of the Solache and
Reyes case. Specifically, Sidley interviewed the three defendants, Adriana Mejia, Gabriel
Solache, and Arturo Reyes, along with witnesses Rosauro and Horatio Mejia. Additionally,
Sidley interviewed Solache’s trial counsel, Viola-Rouse-Armijo, and his current post-conviction
counsel, Jane Raley and Karen Daniel, and Reyes’s current post-conviction counsel, Andrew
Vail and David Saunders. Sidley also met with Detective Halvorsen, who assisted in the
4

After his death sentence was converted to life without parole, Solache’s appeal was remanded to the
appellate court.

7

 investigation of the Soto murders, and the Assistant State’s Attorneys (“ASAs’) currently
representing the State in the post-conviction proceedings, Celeste Stack and Jim Papa. Those
who submitted to interviews cooperated fully with the investigation.
Detective Reynaldo Guevara and Youth Officer Daniel Trevino declined to be
interviewed by Sidley. Moreover, Sidley attempted to interview Carlos Martinez, Adriana
Mejia’s brother, but was unable to locate him.
B.

Document Review

Sidley’s investigation also involved the review of numerous documents received from
Solache’s and Reyes’s current counsel, as well as from the State. Sidley reviewed transcripts
from (1) pre-trial proceedings, including the hearings regarding the defendants’ motions to
suppress their statements; (2) the trial; (3) the sentencing and other post-trial proceedings; and
(4) the post-conviction hearings. Sidley also reviewed a number of police reports, crime scene
records, forensics reports, and medical records related to the case. Additionally, Sidley reviewed
various court filings and prior court opinions.
IV.

ALLEGATIONS OF WRONGDOING AGAINST DETECTIVE GUEVARA

Each of the four individuals detained and questioned about the Soto murders—Solache,
Reyes, Rosauro, and Adriana—claims mistreatment by Guevara. In addition, these statements
were corroborated by Horatio Mejia, Rosauro’s brother. We detail these claims below.
A.

Allegations of Misconduct Against Guevara

1.

Rosauro Mejia

As previously noted, Rosauro Mejia was Adriana Mejia’s husband. Since the trial,
Rosauro divorced Adriana and has re-married. He reports that he has been continually employed
for the past fifteen years at Welch Packaging, where he started as a machine operator and is
currently a forklift operator.
When interviewed by Sidley, Rosauro stated his reluctance to revisit the history of this
case, explaining he has moved on with his life and finds the memories painful. He stated that he
was interrogated by Detective Guevara and others over a period of 2-3 days, he believes
beginning Friday April 3, 1998, after he and Solache and Reyes were transferred to a police
station further north from the one at which they all arrived with the young boy (Santiago Sotos).5
He said he was hit repeatedly by Guevara during the questioning, first after Guevara asked him
“how much he paid for the baby girl” and Rosauro responded that he did not know what Guevara
was talking about. Rosauro said he was not handcuffed, but that he was restrained by another
officer while he was being hit by Guevara. Rosauro said that Guevara hit him with a fist many
times; he noted that there weren’t any marks from the beating because Guevara mostly hit him in
5

Based on police records and trial testimony, Rosauro Mejia, Solache, and Reyes initially arrived at the 8th District
headquarters (3515 West 63d, Chicago) with the boy, Santiago Sotos, and subsequently were taken the Area 5
headquarters for questioning.

8

 the stomach. Rosauro said that Guevara kept trying to get him to admit to involvement in the
crime. He said he had no recollection of providing or signing a written statement (records show
his written statement was taken on April 5, 1998 at 4:00 a.m. He explained that he was held in
the same room for days without sleeping or eating. He believes he was given water “one time,”
and was first offered food shortly before he was cleared to leave. He stated that he was allowed
to use the bathroom.6
Rosauro stated that he has no knowledge whether Solache or Reyes were also beaten, or
otherwise how they were treated, and said that they had been split up and were not ever
questioned together. Rosauro said he understood he was ultimately released because Adriana
told the police he was not involved in the killings.
Rosauro’s statements during our interview were consistent with his testimony at trial in
all material respects (Rosauro was called as a defense witness).
2.

Horatio Mejia

Horatio Mejia is Rosauro Mejia’s brother, and reports having been employed for the past
thirty years at Kronos, where he currently is works as a machine operator.
When interviewed by Sidley, Horatio stated that he was at the Mejia residence when the
police came to speak with Adriana in connection with the Soto murders, and he (and others at the
house) to come to the Area 5 police station for questioning. At the station, Horatio was
interviewed in Spanish by a Puerto Rican officer he believes to be Guevara. Horatio reports he
was questioned for only a couple of hours. Horatio said he did not witness anyone being struck
while at the station. However, he , but that he heard sounds of someone being hit while he was
at the station, who he thought was his brother Rosauro. Horatio said that he heard someone
yelling—he believes at his brother—and telling him not to lie. Horatio also reported having seen
Adriana Mejia at one point while she was walking from one place to another with officers and he
thought her face was reddened as if she had been hit. Horatio also reported that after Rosauro
was released, he returned home and told Horatio that he had been beaten by the police and was
accused of lying.
3.

Adriana Mejia

Adriana Mejia was interviewed by Sidley at the Logan Correctional Facility. Regarding
the issue of Guevara’s conduct, Adriana also claims she was mistreated during her interrogation,
including physically abused by Guevara. In particular, she stated that while Guevara was
interrogating her, he hit her in the face, causing her nose to bleed, and that he also hit her hard on
the back. She at one point stated that two other officers were in the room when she was hit, but
at another point said no one else saw Guevara hit her.7 Adriana also stated that Guevara
threatened that an “accident” might happen to her family if she did not cooperate.
6

Rosauro Mejia’s signed statement, in contrast, says that Rosauro was “treated fairly,” and had “been given food to
eat and drink.”
7

At the spring 2000 suppression hearing, she testified to somewhat different physical abuse by Guevara—she stated
that he pulled her hair and hit her in the back very hard, and told her that he was tired of her lies—she did not then

9

 Adriana also stated that at one point she was taken by Guevara to a room where Solache
was being held, and they were told to discuss what they had planned. She said that, when they
both stayed quiet, Guevara “slapped him around.” She said Solache was handcuffed during this
time. In addition, Adriana stated that, when she was taken away from that room, she heard
Guevara and another officer yelling at Solache and cursing him. Adriana also stated that she was
similarly taken to a room where Reyes was being held, but did not see Reyes being struck.
Adriana said she was handcuffed during almost the entire time she was being held,
sometimes to the wall, and sometimes with her hands together. She reported being held in the
same room from Friday until Sunday and that she was not allowed to go to a bathroom and given
no food or drink until Sunday afternoon, when she received a hamburger and a juice. She stated
that she did not believe she had slept during this entire period.8 Adriana reported being told by
Guevara that she should talk to the police so that she could help herself and eventually go home
and that they refused to allow her to speak with an attorney or with any family members.
4.

Gabriel Solache

Solache’s original counsel, Viola Rouse-Armijo, reported to us that Solache told her of
physical abuse by Detective Guevara at her first meeting with him. Since then, he has
consistently maintained that he was physically abused by Guevara throughout the life of his
case.9
In his interview with Sidley, Solache stated that when he was first was questioned by
Guevara, Guevara hit him more than once with the open palm of his hand on the left side of
Solache’s face. Solache stated that his right arm was handcuffed to the wall so Guevara couldn’t
readily reach the right side of his face. He also stated that, at some point, Guevara brought
Adriana Mejia into the room where Solache was being questioned and asked Solache if he would
deny his participation in the crimes in front of her. After Guevara took Adriana out of the room,
he returned without her, and repeatedly punched Solache in the stomach, until eventually
Solache admitted he had participated in the crimes. Solache stated that this physical abuse
prompted him to admit involvement in the murders.
The version of Solache’s allegations against Guevara as reported to us is substantially
similar to Solache’s testimony motion to suppress hearing. He told essentially the same story at
the hearing but with the added detail that Guevara hit him across the face while Adriana was in
the room. Mot. to Suppr. Hr’g Tr., March 3, 2000, at 128-31. Solache’s June 2000 trial
testify that he hit her in the face. Mot. to Suppr. Hr’g Tr. March 30, 2000, at D – 69-70. At the hearing, she did
state that, at some point during her detention, her nose began to bleed but she did not state that the nosebleed was a
result of physical abuse. Id. at D – 84-85.
8

Adriana Mejia’s signed statement says that she was “treated well by the police,” and that “she was allowed to use
the bathroom whenever she needed to.”

9

However, Solache’s signed a written statement stating that he “was treated good by the police” while in custody
and that he made the statement “freely and voluntarily.” Solache also did not communicate the alleged mistreatment
to officials at Cook County jail.

10

 testimony and April 2013 post-conviction hearing testimony was also consistent with his prior
statements: He again stated that (1) Guevara hit him on the left side of his face several times
while questioning him; (2) Guevara brought Adriana into the room where Solache was being
held, questioned them both, and then hit Solache in the face again in front of Adriana, and; (3)
Guevara took Adriana out of the room and then returned and hit Solache in the stomach. Trial
Tr. June 19, 2000, at Q – 102-104; PC Hr’g Tr. April 9, 2013, at 49-51.
Solache also told us that he suffered hearing loss in his left ear after being hit by Guevara.
Solache also stated that in June or July of 1997, a family member threw a brick at his head
during a dispute about the family member’s drinking, resulting in a head injury that required
Solache to be hospitalized for eighteen days. He still has a noticeable scar above his left ear
from his injury. Solache told us that he did not know whether the injury had affected his hearing
in some way, but he was sure that he could still hear out of his left ear after the accident.
Solache admitted that he previously told the hospital attendants the injury was the result of a car
accident because he did not want to get his family member in trouble. When questioned about
his injury at trial, there too, he falsely reported that it was the result of a car accident. Mot. to
Suppr. Hr’g Tr. March 3, 2000, at 160-61.
According to Solache’s trial testimony, he realized he had suffered hearing loss when,
sometime after his interrogation and arrest, he was attempting to use a phone when he realized
that he could not hear from his left ear. Trial Tr. Jun 19, 2000 at Q – 108. Solache reported his
hearing loss to Dr. Ross Romin, a physician at the Cook County jail in May 1998—roughly a
month after his arrest. Id. at Q – 60-61. Dr. Romin testified at trial that Solache did indeed have
significant hearing loss in his left ear, and that Solache told him he believed the hearing loss was
a result of police abuse he had suffered. Id. at Q - 61. Dr. Romin also testified that Solache told
him about the accident he suffered the previous year (which, at the time, Solache still described
as a car accident). Id. at Q - 63. Dr. Romin was unable to identify the cause of Solache’s
hearing loss.
In rebuttal of Solache’s physical abuse allegations, the State proffered Officer Saul
Basurto and Medical Technician John Musa at the suppression hearing. Basurto, who speaks
Spanish, processed Solache at Cook County lock-up on April 5, 1998. He testified that when he
processed Solache, he observed no evidence of physical abuse, and Solache reported no such
abuse. Mot. to Suppr. Hr’g Tr. November 23, 1999, at V–8, V-10. Similarly, Musa testified that
he performed the medical intake process for Solache on April 6, 1998, and that he observed no
evidence of physical abuse, and Solache reported no such abuse. Mot. to Suppr. Hr’g Tr. March
3, 2000, at 91-9. Basurto also testified during the State’s case against Solache at trial, but Musa
did not.
In our interview, Solache also maintained that, while detained from early Friday morning
until his confession on Sunday, he were not given food or drink until the time frame when he
signed a confession. He stated that for most of this period, he was handcuffed, often to the wall.

11

 Solache also stated that he was only once taken to the bathroom, and that he was forced to
urinate into a container in the room in which he was being held.10
5.

Arturo Reyes

Reyes’s account of the physical abuse he claims Guevara subjected him to has remained
consistent over time. When Sidley interviewed him, he told us that Guevara physically abused
him on two separate occasions during the course of his interrogation. The first time when was
during Reyes’s first encounter with Guevara when, according to Reyes, Guevara slapped him
across the face and asked him why he did it. The second time was during a subsequent interview
in which Guevara was questioning Reyes, and when Reyes did not admit to his involvement in
the crimes, Guevara repeatedly slapped him across the face. Reyes told us that this went on for
“a long time.” Reyes’s suppression hearing, trial, and post-conviction testimony regarding his
allegations of abuse by Guevara were essentially the same. The only potential inconsistency is
that in some versions of his first encounter with Guevara, Reyes mentions that Guevara removed
his hat before hitting him and in other versions, he omits the detail about the hat.
In rebuttal of Reyes’s physical abuse allegations at the suppression hearing, the State
proffered Officer Saul Basurto. Basurto, who speaks Spanish, processed Reyes at Cook County
lock-up on April 5, 1998. He testified that when he processed Reyes, he observed no evidence of
physical abuse, and Reyes reported no such abuse. Similarly, Musa testified that he performed
the medical intake process for Reyes on April 6, 1998, and that he observed no evidence of
physical abuse, and Reyes reported no such abuse. (Basurto also testified during the State’s case
against Reyes at trial, but Musa did not.)
Reyes also stated that he was handcuffed during most of his time while being detained
and interrogated, that he was only given a single sandwich during his detention from Friday
through Sunday, and that he was denied bathroom breaks.11
C.

Conclusions Regarding Allegations of Misconduct

We find the allegations that Guevara physically abused Solache and Reyes in an effort to
coerce them to admit their involvement in the Soto murders are credible, and that it is more
likely than not that Solache and Reyes were, in fact, physically abused during the course of their
interrogations. In this regard, we given substantial weight to our interviews of Rosauro Mejia
and Horatio Mejia, neither of whom have any apparent reason to lie in this matter and both of
whom appeared credible. Although less compelling, we also credit Adriana Mejia’s statement of
having witnessed Solache being struck by Guevara, given that she had no apparent motivation to
assist Solache in this regard (as discussed further below, for example, she continued to identify
Solache as having been involved in the murders). We further note that the defendants promptly
10

In contrast, his written statement says that he had receive “three sandwiches to eat and pop and water to drink and
cigarettes to smoke” and had “been able to use the bathroom when he wanted.” In addition the Assistant States
Attorney who took his statement testified that Solache was smoking a cigarette during the time of her interview.
11

Reyes written statement, however, says that “he was given sandwiches to eat, pop to drink, and was allowed to
use the washroom whenever he wanted.” The statement also says he “was treated very well by the police.”

12

 raised allegations of physical abuse with counsel (although not to Cook County jail officials or to
the ASAs taking their statements), and that there appears to be no claim that they unreasonably
or suspiciously delayed raising these allegations.
We also did not view the absence of any notable markings from the abuse to refute
defendants’ claims, given that their descriptions of the manner in which they were hit would not
necessarily leave any marks. Neither defendant claimed (either to us or in prior testimony) to
have suffered bruising, bleeding, or other symptoms as a result of the beatings. Moreover,
Solache and Reyes have consistently maintained that they were slapped across the face with an
open palm or punched in the stomach and do not claim to have been physically marked by this
conduct. In addition, Rosauro Mejia similarly reported that he left with no noticeable marks or
bruises following his interrogation. Notably, in reaching our conclusion, we did not credit
Solache’s claim that his hearing loss was the result of Guevara’s abuse (we believe there was
substantial evidence to suggest that the hearing loss may have instead arisen from his fight in
1997).
V.

ACTUAL INNOCENCE CLAIMS

Our finding that Detective Guevara physically abused Solache and Reyes in the course of
his interrogations, and that this abuse taints their ultimate confessions, does not, however, mean
that their confessions were materially false or that they are actually innocent of the charges. In
fact, we have concluded that the evidence available to us leads us to reject their claims of actual
innocence. This section of our Report details the evidence related to the claims of actual
innocence presented by Solache and Reyes.
A.

Evidence Concerning Actual Innocence Claims
1.

Adriana Mejia.

In our interview with Adriana Mejia, she continued to admit her own involvement in the
murders, continued to identify Solache and Reyes as participants in crime, and more than once
stated that all three were equally responsible. She did not implicate anyone else. That said, in
her interview she not only alleged abuse by Guevara (as discussed above) but also contended that
the facts were materially different than what was reflected in her signed confession. She
contended that she did no understand what was in the written statement at time of her signing it,
and at one point claimed that Guevara had written the statement and told her she could go home
if she signed it.
Although she contended the facts were different than what was reflected in her statement,
none of the differences were exculpatory in nature. Her main complaint about the details of the
confession was that she felt if blamed her more than Solache, but that in fact all three were
equally responsible. For example, Adriana stated that she told Solache, not Reyes, that she was
not pregnant and Solache told her of idea to pay money to Norma Salazar for a baby. She
claimed that she gave $600 to Solache, not to Reyes, and claimed that she was surprised when
Reyes showed up with Solache when they drove to get the baby. She explained that she was
closer to Solache, whom she had known since childhood in Mexico, than to Reyes. Adriana also

13

 denied that she had followed Mariano Soto and her baby to the Sotos home, and instead
contended that she first saw them both at the time of the murders.12
Adriana Mejia also provided additional details that do not appear to be included in the
police records or her written statement. She stated that one of Soto’s knives used in the murders
was taken by her from the scene (she said the knife had been wrapped up with the baby girl
somehow), and that Solache asked for the knife from her after they left; she said she did not
know what Solache did with that knife. Adriana also said that she later saw Solache and Reyes
washing their clothes with bleach when back home, and said they threw their clothes out; she
said she asked Solache about this and was told “all was under control” and she did not need to do
the same. Adriana also stated that she had “written everything down” before her sentencing and
mailed it to her mother in Mexico.
Adriana’s story of the murders has of course changed over time, with her initially
denying any involvement, failing a polygraph examination, and apparently giving different
descriptions of precisely what happened even after admitting involvement in the murders (she
now denies giving different stories, and claims that her written statement contains numerous
errors that mischaracterizes what she actually said). Her statement to us also minimized her own
culpability in the planning, claiming, for example, that Solache identified the Sotos baby, and
that she had thought she was paying Solache to buy the baby and not to assist with the murders.
Under these circumstances, we believe it would be improper to reach any conclusions about the
precise details of the planning and the murders themselves based solely on Adriana’s say so.
That said, it is undisputed that the murders were committed by multiple persons,
Adriana’s own participation is undisputed (and supported by physical evidence), and Adriana
does not appear to have a current motive to continue to identify both Reyes or Solache as
involved in the murders. Moreover, her interview with us was consistent with her prior
statements to police and the ASA on the fundamental points of the murders regarding the basic
facts and who was involved.
2.

Other Evidence Relating to Solache

Brualdi/Guevara. With respect to the case against Solache, Detective Guevara and ASA
Heather Brualdi testified about Solache’s confession. Detective Guevara testified that Solache
told him that he went to the Soto residence with Reyes and Adriana, Adriana knocked on the
door, and when Jacinto Soto came to the door, Reyes stabbed her in the chest. Guevara stated
further that Solache told him that Adriana then stabbed Jacinta, while Solache grabbed a knife
from the kitchen, went to the bedroom where Mariano Soto was sleeping, and stabbed him
multiple times. Then, according to Guevara, Solache said he ran out to the car, and shortly
thereafter, Adriana came out with the baby girl, and then Reyes came out with the little boy;

12

Regarding other differences between her written statement and our interview, Adriana told us that (1) Solache told
her that Norma Salazar was going to sell them a baby; (2) she called Solache, not Reyes, from the hospital at some
point prior to the murders; (3) Solache was driving the car on the night of the murders; (4) when they got to the Soto
residence, Solache opened the front door with a coat hanger; (5) it was Solache’s idea to bring Santiago Soto with
them.

14

 Reyes and Solache then dropped Adriana off at the hospital with the two children before
returning home.
ASA Brualdi (whose conduct has never been credibly challenged in this case) testified
that Guevara translated for her as she interviewed Solache. She first took an oral statement from
Solache, which she said took about 45 minutes, and later took the written statement used at trial,
which she said took about an hour. At trial, she described Solache as providing a narrative
description of his involvement in the murders (as translated by Guevara) in response to her
questions, which she characterized as in the nature of open-ended “what happened next?”
questions. Brualdi testified that, after she wrote the statement, she gave it to Guevara who
interpreted it line by line for Solache to confirm it was correct (she acknowledged, however, that
she did not understand any of the Spanish spoken by Solache and Guevara). Brualdi also testified
that she, Guevara, and Solache signed every page of the statement and initialed all changes
made.
Halvorsen. When we interviewed Ernest Halvorsen, Guevara’s former partner, he
recalled little about the investigation of the Soto murders, but he did mention one detail related to
Solache. He told us that he had heard that Santiago Soto told Officer Trevino that Solache was
“the boogeyman” and that when they brought Solache into the office, the boy started “screaming
his head off,” and called Solache “Diablo.” However, any such statements were translated
through Officer Trevino (who declined to meet with us) and were not memorialized in any police
report. Because of our inability to confirm this exchange with Officer Trevino, we have given it
little if any weight in our analysis.
Rosauro Mejia/Horatio Mejia. When separately interviewed by us, Rosauro and
Horatio Mejia both denied any knowledge of the murders and denied having known that Adriana
was in fact not pregnant.13 Rosauro stated, however, that money they had saved was in fact
missing from the house after the murders (he did not know who took it). Rosauro also stated that
the boy (Santiago Soto) “seemed afraid of them” (Solache and Reyes), although he also said that
the boy always acted scared and did not talk (except to say his name was Chago).14 When asked
generally what he thought of Solache’s and Reyes’ innocence claims, Rosauro said “only they
and God know what happened.” 15 Horatio Mejia also stated that he believed Solache sometimes
drove Adriana to the health clinic.
Solache. In our interview, as at trial, Solache denied any knowledge of the murders and
denied having known that Adriana was in fact not pregnant. On the day of the murders (March
28, 1998), Solache stated he had worked from 4:30 p.m. (on March 27) until 3:00 a.m. (March
28). He estimated that he reached home at around 4:30 a.m., saw and spoke briefly with Carlos
13

Horatio Mejia, however, stated that, once Adriana was home with the baby, “everyone thought the baby was too
big,” and he thought it was odd that a woman at the hospital would simply give the three-year old to Adrianna.

14

We understand that Chango is in fact a common nickname for Santiago.

15

Rosauro Mejia reported that in his limited contacts with Adriana after her arrest, she never said anything about
Solache or Reyes. In particular, Rosauro reported receiving a letter from Adriana Mejia, which he tore up, which
said in part that “she did it for me.” Rosauro reporting receiving telephone calls on two or three occasions from
Adriana where “she said she did if for me because she knew I couldn’t have kids.”

15

 Martinez (Adriana’s brother with whom Solache shared a room) who was also on his way to
bed.16 Solache said he went to bed and when he got up in middle of the day Adriana already had
the baby at the house along with the little boy (he said he woke up to the baby crying). Solache
stated he did not see Reyes or anyone else besides Carlos before going to bed. For the rest of
that week, Solache said he went to work, as normal (Monday – Friday) and described nothing
unusual until his return from work early Friday morning April 3, 1998. At that point, he came
upon Rosauro and Adriana Mejia arguing about the little boy and heard of the television news
story that the boy’s parents had been murdered. Rosauro asked Solache to go with him to the
police station. Solache agreed and he, Rosauro, and Reyes all went together with the boy to the
station. Solache reported that he never talked with Adriana Mejia regarding her having
identified him as involved in the murders, and that he could not think of any reason why she
would have falsely identified him (he described her as an “acquaintance” not a friend). Solache
did however report to us that he received “two or three” letters from Adriana shortly after he was
jailed, but said he could not recall what she said in the letters and no longer has them.
With regard to the manner in which his statement was taken by ASA Brualdi, at trial
Solache testified that he simply said “yes” or “no” to Guevara’s leading statements, and did not
provide a narrative. He said he agreed with Guevara in order to avoid being hit. In our
interview, Solache similarly stated that he confessed in order to avoid being abused further.
Solache did not, however, explain that he simply said “yes” or “no” to leading statements from
Guevara while being interviewed by Brualdi; he instead said he could not recall the specifics of
the interview, and simply said he responded to questions and Brualdi “wrote things down.”
2.

Other Evidence Relating to Arturo Reyes

O’Malley/Guevara. With respect to the case against Reyes, Detective Guevara testified
that Reyes confessed to participating in the murders of Jacinta and Mariano Soto. Relying on his
April 30, 1998 supplementary report of the Soto murder investigation to refresh his recollection,
Detective Guevara recounted what Reyes told him during Guevara’s second interview of Reyes.
According to Guevara, Reyes then told Guevara that he and Solache had helped Adriana Mejia
kill the Sotos so she could get a baby. Guevara reported that Reyes admitted that he stabbed
Jacinta Soto in the chest, saw Adriana stabbing Jacinta Soto, and saw Solache stabbing Mariano
Soto. Detective Guevara also testified that Reyes had two pieces of paper in his pocket with the
names “Norma Salazar, ” “Adriana Martinez,” “Leonardo,” and the word “hospital” on them,
along with several phone numbers.17 (None of the numbers were in service except for

16

At trial, Solache stated that Carlos Martinez was laying in bed when he spoke with him on the morning of March
28, 1998. According to police reports, Carlos Martinez told officers that he arrived home after midnight on morning
of March 28, 1998 and went to bed. He made no mention of seeing Solache, or anyone else, although it does not
appear he was specifically asked. Carlos Martinez was not called as a witness at trial by either the state or
defendants. We note that Solache stated that Carlos Martinez visited him at the jail, but they did not talk about the
case. We were unable to locate Carlos Martinez, and thus did not interview him.

17

“Martinez” is Adriana Mejia’s maiden name. “Leonardo,” is what Adriana called Santiago Soto while he was in
her care.

16

 Adriana’s). Guevara testified further that Reyes had a calendar book in his possession with
Norma Salazar’s name written on one of the pages.18
Notably, Guevara was not present for Reyes’ interview and confession before ASA
O’Malley. Instead, Youth Officer Daniel Trevino served as the translator for Reyes while he
gave a statement to ASA O’Malley. Trevino’s testimony at trial concerning the substance of
Reyes’s confession is substantially the same as Guevara’s.
ASA O’Malley (whose conduct has not been credibly challenged in this case) testified
that he first met with Reyes for about an hour, with Trevino acting as translator. O’Malley stated
that, during this initial interview, Reyes gave a largely narrative statement of what happened. He
later returned to Reyes and took a written statement from him, which again took about an hour.
O’Malley characterized his questions during this session as generally open ended, in the nature
of “what happened next.” According to O’Malley, he took the statement line by line—either
Reyes would give a narrative or answer a question posed by O’Malley, Trevino would translate
into English, O’Malley would write the statement and read it back to Trevino, who would then
translate it into Spanish and confirm with Reyes that the statement was accurate. Additionally,
O’Malley testified that, at one point, Reyes got up and demonstrated how he stabbed Jacinto
Soto. O’Malley stated that he, Trevino, and Reyes signed the bottom of each page and when the
statement was completed, Trevino translated it for Reyes in its entirety.
Guadalupe Mejia. Guadalupe Mejia gave a written statement to the police, not
presented at trial, in which she said that, at some point after Adriana brought the children home
from the hospital but before the defendants took Santiago Soto to the police station, she
overheard a phone call between Adriana and Reyes. Specifically, she said she was on an
extension of the phone, and she heard Reyes ask, “What did they say?” and Adriana responded,
“Nine o’clock at their house.” Then Reyes asked how he would know the address and Adriana
said “they” would call back. Then, according to Guadalupe, Reyes said, “You are the only one
that knows[,] I hope you don’t send me up head first,” and Adriana replied that she would not.
In our interview with Reyes, he denied any knowledge of this alleged conversation.
Reyes. In our interview, as at trial, Reyes denied any knowledge of the murders and
denied having known that Adriana was in fact not pregnant. On the day of the murders, Reyes
said he had returned from work in the early morning of March 28, 1998, and went to sleep in his
room. He stated that he had not seen anyone when he came home (he did not share a bedroom).
Reyes said after getting up later that morning, he heard the doorbell and opened the door for
Rosauro, Adriana, and Guadalupe Mejia, who came in together with a baby and a small boy. He
said the little boy went to the basement where Guadalupe and her husband lived. Reyes further
stated that when he went to the kitchen to prepare his lunch for work, that Guadalupe was
18

In our interview, Reyes explained his possession of these items as follows: He told us, consistent with his prior
testimony, that on Monday, March 30, 1998, Adriana Mejia asked him to babysit Santiago Soto (others confirmed
that he took car of the Soto boy for one day). He stated further that Adriana gave him the two pieces of paper in
case of emergency, and told him that Norma Salazar was the child’s mother. In our analysis, we do not give any
weight to Reyes’ possession of these papers, because they appear equally consistent with either Reyes’ guilt or
innocence.

17

 changing the baby and then began changing her own clothes. (His statements about the arrival of
the baby and boy and Guadalupe’s conduct were not elicited in his prior trial testimony.) With
regard to the remainder of the week before going to the police station with the boy, Reyes told us
he went to work as normal except for one day when he babysat the Soto boy at Adriana’s
request.
With regard to the manner in which his statement was taken by ASA O’Malley, Reyes
has given inconsistent testimony and statements. At trial, Reyes broadly denied that he said
anything about the murders of the Sotos in his interview with O’Malley and Trevino. He further
denied having any awareness that the statement he signed was a confession to his involvement in
these murders. In our interview with Reyes, however, he stated that Officer Trevino gave him
“examples” of what to say, and he would repeat the examples in response to O’Malley’s
questions. For instance, Reyes stated that Trevino gave him an “example” of something to say
about stabbing the Sotos and that he repeated it out of fear that, if he did not, he would be
returned to a room with Guevara. Reyes stated in the interview that he did not understand or
recall exactly what Trevino was saying or what exactly he (Reyes) repeated. Reyes also stated in
our interview that could not recall whether Trevino read him the statement in Spanish, but he
told us that he did not understand that the statement he signed said that he had helped kill the
Sotos.19
C.

Conclusions Regarding Actual Innocence Claims

Although the evidence at trial depended almost entirely on defendants’ confessions,
which we find were obtained in part through physical abuse by Detective Guevara, we
nonetheless reject both Solache’s and Reyes’ claims of actual innocence. Adriana Mejia
continues to identify them both as involved with her in the double murders, even while also
supporting their claims of physical abuse while in custody. There are of course many reasons to
doubt Adriana’s credibility, especially concerning the details of the crimes, yet it is undisputed
that she was assisted in the murders by at least one male, she has no apparent motive to continue
to misidentify both Reyes and Solache, and neither Solache nor Reyes presented alibi evidence
(to us or at trial) beyond their unsubstantiated claims of being asleep at home on the morning of
the murders.
In addition, the defendants’ detailed statements of the murders before ASAs Brualdi and
O’Malley are inconsistent with their innocence claims. Defendants have not given a coherent
explanation as to how or why, if they are indeed innocent and wholly ignorant of the events, they
were able to supply the ASAs with detailed facts describing their roles in the crimes. Moreover,
their characterizations of how these statements were taken are directly at odds with the testimony
of the ASAs, which we credit. In particular, Reyes gave different explanations of how his
statement was taken (at trial claiming nothing was said about the Sotos murders during the ASA
19

Reyes’s more recent testimony in post-conviction proceedings is similar to what he stated to us in our interview.
There too, he said that Officer Trevino gave him “examples” of what he could say. He testified in more detail about
these examples than during our interview, stating that Trevino told him to say that Solache picked him up on the
night of the murders and then drove to pick up Adriana before the three of them headed to the Soto residence; and
that that he stabbed Jacinta Soto and grabbed her baby girl. Reyes testified that all those statements were untrue, and
were provided to avoid further abuse from Guevara.

18

 meeting and now claiming he simply repeated “examples” provided to him by Trevino) which
we believe renders his characterization of how the statement was given not credible. Solache’s
claim (at trial) that he simply provided “yes” or “no” answers is similarly not credible given the
ASA’s testimony describing Solache’s narrative responses to questions (even though the ASA
did not understand Spanish, she certainly could testify to the nature of her questions and
Solache’s responses without any reference to the accuracy of Guevara’s translation).20
Finally, in reaching this conclusion, we recognize that the case against both Solache and
Reyes is very thin if one does not take into consideration their confessions. No physical
evidence was discovered that tied either Solache or Reyes to the crime scene (despite the grisly
nature of the murders and the fact that Adriana Mejia’s DNA was found there).21 Moreover, they
had no criminal backgrounds before this case, and had little apparent motive to assist Adriana in
these crimes (they were both employed, making the promised $600 payment an even more
meager incentive than it appears on its face). Thus, in rejecting Solache’s and Reyes’ claims of
actual innocence, we do not mean to suggest that we found the case against them to be a strong
one.

20

It should be noted that the evidence of guilt against Reyes is stronger than against Solache, given that, accordingly
to police reports, Adriana Mejia did not initially identify Solache as being involved (with one report expressly
denying his involvement), and Guadalupe Mejia provided a statement of a suspicious telephone conversation
between Adriana Mejia and Reyes in the week after the murders.

21

We also note the unexplained presence of DNA belonging to an unidentified male on the blood-stained green
towel recovered from Rosauro Mejia’s car. Mariano Soto, Arturo Reyes, and Gabriel Solache were all affirmatively
excluded as possible matches for this DNA. No other samples were tested against it.

19