In the Face of Charges Against Julia Chuñil’s Children: What Objectivity Are We Discussing?

Original article: Ante la formalización de los hijos de Julia Chuñil: ¿de qué objetividad nos hablan?

Protected witnesses, testimony without defense attorney from a co-defendant indicating Julia Chuñil’s children as alleged murderers, in a context of threats, and a regional prosecutor charged with illegal coercion against one of Julia Chuñil’s daughters, now facing charges.

By Francisca Fernández Droguett, member of the Space Day by Day for Julia Chuñil.

We find ourselves once again confronted with the horror and negligence of a justice system that operates from racism and misinformation in the indictment and formalization of three of Julia Chuñil’s children, who has been missing for over a year and two months in the Máfil area, Los Ríos region. The children, previously complainants, are now being treated as the primary suspects in her disappearance and death.

It is important to note that the only thing the Prosecutor’s Office has presented so far is a report lacking forensic evidence, relying solely on accounts from protected witnesses, statements from individuals, and a co-defendant, Julia’s son-in-law, who claimed that Julia’s children allegedly murdered her amidst threats.

It was suggested to him that if he went into preventive detention, his children would end up in Sename, without having a defense attorney present during the testimony, and there were previous indications of alcoholism, information provided by defense attorney Karina Riquelme on January 15, 2026, during the formalization.

Ana Cato was the last person to see Julia Chuñil alive. On November 10, 2024, she allegedly told Javier, Julia’s son and the principal accused, that his mother had gone out to look for her animals two days prior and had not returned. This same individual accompanied Jeannette, Julia’s daughter and another of the accused, to report her disappearance to the Carabineros, but they did not take her statement due to cognitive problems. Today, it is suggested by the Prosecutor’s Office that she is one of the protected witnesses.

The other testimonies come from neighbors, such as one who claimed that a neighbor near a cheese factory heard an argument between Julia Chuñil and her children, despite a hill separating them, making it difficult to overhear a conversation due to the spatial characteristics.

We cannot overlook the illegal coercion against Jeannette by the same prosecutor, Tatiana Esquivel, who is now formalizing her and who at one point incited her to self-incriminate. A complaint was filed with the Supreme Court and the National Prosecutor’s Office.

It is the same prosecutor who has systematically denied Julia Chuñil’s status as a territorial/environmental defender, as she was protecting 900 hectares of native forest against the interests of agribusiness and forestry companies.

Today, preventive detention is being proposed as a form of preemptive punishment, based on a formalization that has offered no indications of substantial evidence, ignoring the cultural practices of the Mapuche people related to the actions of the children and Julia Chuñil herself, operating solely from criminalization rather than the presumption of innocence.

In conclusion, one of the supposed pieces of evidence for formalizing charges against Pablo San Martín, a family spokesperson and son of Julia Chuñil, is possessing his mother’s identification card, which she should have had with her at the time of her disappearance. Is it conceivable that someone goes out with their ID to look for their animals? Of course not. Furthermore, Pablo always displayed his mother’s ID, and at no point was he asked to surrender it. On the day of his detention, it was in a visible altar-like space for everyone to see.