Ernesto Zedillo Complaint

Case 3:11-cv-01433-AWT Document 1 Filed 09/16/11 Page 1 of 28
\
\
UNITEfT tTRICT COURT
DIStRlt-dECTICUT
"Jane Doe 1, an alien;
I Jane Doe 2, an alien;
)Jane Doe 3, an alien;
-Jane Doe 4, an alien;
John Doe 1, an alien;
John Doe 5, an alien; and
John Doe 6, an alien,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Eresto Zedillo Ponce de Leon,
an alien resident of Connecticut,
Defendant.
l tr | b
}
A II: 2b
}
Civil Action No. ______
l` _ [
.1
"`` , , , oj 'T

}
"J '
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
}
COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs, Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John
Doe 3, John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6, through undersigned counsel, sue Defendant,
Eresto Zedillo Ponce de Leon ("Defendant Zedillo"), and allege:
INTRODUCTION
1. This is a civil action for compensatory and punitive damages, for declaratory
judgment, and for torts in violation of interational and domestic law. Plaintiffs institute this
action against Defendant Zedillo for his responsibility in: (a) the extrajudicial killings of
decedents Richard Roe 1 and Mary Roe 1 (parents of Plaintiffs Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe
3), and of decedent Mary Roe 2 (wife of Plaintiff John Doe 1 and mother of John Doe 2, John
Doe 3 and John Doe 6) (collectively, the "Decedents"); (b) injuries caused during the attempted
extrajudicial killings of Plaintiffs Jane Doe 2, John Doe 2, and John Doe 3; and (c) the attempted
extrajudicial killing of Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe I, John Doe 4, John Doe 5,
and John Doe 6.
2. Plaintiffs also bring claims against Defendant Zedillo for: (a) war crimes; (b)
crimes against humanity; (c) cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment; (d) terror and violence
to violate freedom of association; and (e) terror and violence to violate freedom of thought,
political opinion and freedom to exercise the political franchise.
3. At all times material hereto, while he was the President of the United States of
Mexico ("Mexico"), Defendant Zedillo exercised command responsibility over, ordered,
conspired with, acted in concert with, engaged in a joint criminal enterprise with, and/or aided
and abetted, directly and/or indirectly, various members andor agents of one or more
subdivisions, instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Federal Goverment of Mexico (the
"Mexican Goverent"), including, inter alia, paramilitary groups trained, armed or protected
by members and/or personnel of the Mexican Army, or persons or groups acting in coordination
with the Mexican Army or under its control and protection, to commit acts of extrajudicial
killing, attempted extrajudicial killing, torture, crimes against humanity, war crimes, cruel,
inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, terror and violence to violate freedom of
association, feedom of thought, political opinion and feedom to exercise the political fanchise,
all for political purposes, and to cover up said acts. As such, Defendant Zedillo is liable under
domestic and interational law for Plaintiffs' injuries, pain and suffering.
PARTIES
Plainti Jane Doe 1
4. Plaintiff, Jane Doe I, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal, municipality of Chenalh6, State of Chiapas, Mexico ("Acteal").
2
Jane Doe I brings this action in her individual capacity, as well as in her capacity as next-of-kin
for the extrajudicial killing of Richard Roe I (her father) and Mary Roe I (her mother) during a
mass execution carried out against Acteal villagers by groups armed, sponsored and trained by
members and/or personnel of the Mexican Army, or persons or goups acting in coordination
with the Mexican Army or under its control and protection, on December 22, 1997 ("the Acteal
Massacre"). She brings claims of attempted extrajudicial killing, war crimes, crimes against
humanity, cruel, inhuman and degading punishment, terror and violence to violate feedom of
association, and terror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion and feedom
to exercise the political franchise for her own mental pain and suffering in living through and
witnessing the Acteal Massacre. She also brings, in her capacity as next-of-kin of her deceased
relatives, claims for war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and degrading
punishment, terror and violence to violate freedom of association, and terror and violence to
violate feedom of thought, political opinion and feedom to exercise the political franchise.
Jane Doe I seeks to proceed under a pseudonym because she fears reprisals against herself or her
family as a result of her participation in this lawsuit.
Plaintif Jane Doe 2
5. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal. Jane Doe 2 brings this action in her individual capacity, as well
as in her capacity as next-of-kin for the extrajudicial killing of Richard Roe I (her father) and
Mary Roe I (her mother) during the Acteal Massacre. She brings claims of attempted
extrajudicial killing causing injuries, war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and
degrading punishment, terror and violence to violate freedom of association, and terror and
violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political
3
franchise for her own physical and mental pain and suffering in living through, witnessing, and
being injured during the Acteal Massacre. She also brings, in her capacity a next-of-kin of her
deceased relatives, claims of war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and degrading
violate freedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political franchise.
Jane Doe 2 seeks to proceed under a pseudonym because she fears reprisals against herself or her
family as a result of her participation in this lawsuit.
PlaintifJane Doe 3
6. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 3, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speakng indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal. Jane Doe 3 brings this action in her individual capacity, as well
as in her capacity a next-of-kin for the extajudicial killing of Richard Roe I (her father) and
Mary Roe 1 (her mother) during the Acteal Massacre. She brings claims of attempted
extrajudicial killing, war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and degrading
violate freedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political franchise for
her own mental pain and suffering in living through and witnessing the Acteal Massacre. She
also brings, in her capacity as next-of-kin of her deceased relatives, claims of war crimes, crimes
against humanity, cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, terror and violence to violate
feedom of association, and terror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion
and feedom to exercise the political franchise. Jane Doe 3 seeks to proceed under a pseudonym
because she fears reprisals against herself or her family a a result of her participation in this
lawsuit.
4
PlaintifJane Doe 4
7. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal. Jane Doe 4 brings this action in her individual capacity, for
attempted extrajudicial killing, war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and
degrading punishment, terror and violence to violate feedom of association, and terror and
franchise for her own mental pain and suffering in living through and witnessing the Acteal
Massacre. Jane Doe 4 seeks to proceed under a pseudonym because she fears reprisals against
herself or her family as a result of her participation in this lawsuit.
PlaintifJohn Doe 1
8. Plaintiff, John Doe I, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal. John Doe 1 brings this action in his individual capacity, as well
as in his capacity as next-of-kin for the extrajudicial killing of Mary Roe 2 (his wife) during the
Acteal Massacre. He brings claims of attempted extrajudicial killing, war crimes, crimes against
humanity, cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, terror and violence to violate feedom of
association and terror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion and freedom
to exercise the political fanchise for his own mental pain and suffering in living through and
witnessing the Acteal Massacre. He also brings, in his capacity as next-of-kin of his deceased
relatives, claims of war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and degrading
violate freedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political fanchise. John
Doe 1 seeks to proceed under a pseudonym because he fears reprisals against himself or his
family as a result of his participation in this lawsuit.
5
PlaintifJohn Doe 2
9. Plaintiff, John Doe 2, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal. John Doe 2 brings this action in his individual capacity as well
as in his capacity as next-of-kin for the extrajudicial killing of Mary Roe 2 (his mother), for
attempted extajudicial killing causing injuries, war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel,
inhuman and degrading punishment, terror and violence to violate feedom of association, and
terror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion and feedom to exercise the
political franchise for his own physical and mental pain and suffering in living throug,
witnessing, and being injured during the Acteal Massacre. John Doe 2 seeks to proceed under a
pseudonym because he fears reprisals against himself or his family as a result of his participation
in this lawsuit.
PlaintifJohn Doe 3
1 0. Plaintiff, John Doe 3, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
as in his capacity as next-of-kin for the extrajudicial killing of Mary Roe 2 (his mother), for
attempted extrajudicial killing causing injuries, war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel,
inhuman and degrading punishment, terror and violence to violate feedom of association, and
terror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion and feedom to exercise the
political franchise, for his own physical and mental pain and suffering in living through,
witnessing, and being injured during the Acteal Massacre. John Doe 3 seeks to proceed under a
pseudonym because he fears reprisals against himself or his family as a result of his participation
in this lawsuit.
6
PlaintifJohn Doe 4
II. Plaintiff, John Doe 4, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal. John Doe 4 brings this action in his individual capacity, for
violence to violate feedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political
franchise for his own mental pain and suffering in living through and witnessing the Acteal
Massacre. John Doe 4 seeks to proceed under a pseudonym because he fears reprisals against
himself or his family as a result of his participation in this lawsuit.
PlaintifJohn Doe 5
12. Plaintiff, John Doe 5, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
resident of the village of Acteal. John Doe 5 brings this action in his individual capacity, for
attempted extajudicial killing, war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and
violence to violate feedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political
franchise for his own mental pain and suffering in living through and witnessing the Acteal
Massacre. John Doe 5 seeks to proceed under a pseudonym because he fears reprisals against
himself or his family as a result of his participation in this lawsuit.
PlaintifJohn Doe 6
1 3. Plaintiff, John Doe 6, an individual, sui juris, is a Tzotzil-speaking indigenous
as in his capacity a next-of-kin for the extrajudicial killing of Mary Roe 2 (his mother), for
7
franchise, for his own mental pain and suffering in living through, witnessing, and being injured
during the Acteal Massacre. John Doe 6 seeks to proceed under a pseudonym because he fears
reprisals against himself or his family as a result of his paicipation in this lawsuit.
Defendant Eresto Zedilo Ponce de Leon
14. Defendant Zedillo, an individual, sui juris, is a native and citizen of Mexico.
Defendant Zedillo currently resides in Connecticut, and has resided in the u.s. for the last 1 1
years. From December 1, 1994 to November 30, 2000, Defendant Zedillo served as the
President of Mexico.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
15. This Court has jurisdiction over this action based on 28 U.S.C. 1350 (the Alien
Tort Claims Act as well as the Torture Victim Protection Act codified in the note of said code),
28 U.S.C. 1331, and 28 U.S.C. 2201 and 2202.
16. On information and belief, Defendant Zedillo resides in Connecticut. Therefore
venue is proper in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut pursuant to 28
U.S.C. 1391 (b) and/or (d).
17. Defendant Zedillo' s actions set forth herein violate, and Plaintiffs' causes of
action arise from, the law of nations and/or laws or treaties of the United States, including, inter
alia, the following laws, ageements, conventions, resolutions, and treaties, which constitute
specific examples of the applicable law of nations or customary intemational law:
a. Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1350;
b. Torture Victim Protection Act, 28 U.S.C. 1350;
8
c. Common law of the United States of America;
d. United Nations Charter, 59 Stat. 1031,3 Bevans 1 1 53 (1 945);
e. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 21 7A(iii), U.N. Doc. A810
(1 948);
f. Interational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, G.A. Res. 2220(A)(xxi), 21
U.N. Doc., GAOR Supp. (No. 1 6) at 52, U.N. Doc. Al631 6 (1966);
g. Interational Covenant Against Torture and Other Crue!, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment, G.A. Res. 39/46, 39 U.N. Doc., GAOR Supp. (No. 51 )
at 197, U.N. Doc. Al39/51 ( 1 984) (ratified 1 0/28/1998);
h. Declaration on the Protection of All Persons From being Subjected to Torture and
other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, G.A. Res. 3452, 30
U.N. Doc., GAOR Supp. (No. 34) at 91, U.N. Doc. Al1 0034 ( 1 976);
1. Vienna Declaration and Programe of Action (World Conference on Human
Rights, 1 993);
J.
Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions (Convention for the Amelioration of the
Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, entered into
force Oct. 21, 1 950,for the United States Feb. 2, 1 956,6 U.S.T. 31 14, T.l.A.s.
3362, 75 U.N.T.S. 31 ; Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the
Wounded, Sick, and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, entered into
force Oct. 21 , 1950,for the United States Feb. 2, 1 956,6 U.S.T. 3217, T.l.A.S.
3363,75 U.N.T.S. 85; Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,
entered into force Oct. 21 , 1950, for the United States Feb. 2, 1956, 6 U.S.T.
3316, T.I.A.S. 3364, 75 U.N.T.S. 135; Convention Relative to the Protection of
9
Civilian Persons in Time of War, entered int% rce Oct. 21, 1950, /or the United
States Feb. 2, 1956, 6 U.S.T. 3516, T.I.A.S. 3365, 75 U.N.T.S. 287.) (the "Four
Geneva Conventions"); and
k. Statutes and common law of Mexico.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Background
18. The State of Chiapas, Mexico ("Chiapas") is a mountainous region located in the
south-central area of Mexico, bordering Guatemala. Historically, the economic advances and
moderity of other regions of Mexico, including Mexico City, have not beneftted the residents
of Chiapas. Chiapas has been among the most underdeveloped states in the country. Most of the
residents of Chiapas live in extreme poverty and have had little access to the most basic services,
including electricity, sanitation, medical care, education, and dependable transportation. Prior to
1994, Chiapas was fairly isolated fom the goverent power center in Mexico City, and there
was little investment in the region. Roads to many of the villages and towns were nonexistent or
in precarious condition, resulting in their isolation.
19. This situation was exacerbated by persistent racist attitudes toward many of the
inhabitants of Chiapas. Most people in those areas are of indigenous descent, unlike the white or
mestizo popUlations of the developed areas of Mexico, including Mexico City. Many speak a
variety of languages, including Tzotzil, as their first language, rather than Spanish. These ethnic
and cultural differences played significant roles in the mistreatment endured by Chiapas residents
from Mexican goverental entities and the wealthy landowners of the region.
10
20. On January 1, 1994, the Ejercito Zapatista de Liberaci6n Nacional, or Zapatista
Army of National Liberation ("EZLN"), an indigenous, separatist movement in Chiapas,
announced its existence and promptly declared war against the Mexican Govermnent.
21. The EZLN advocates a socialist ideology that demands social and economIC
justice for indigenous populations. The EZLN attempted to promote its social policies by means
of armed conflict against the Mexican Govermnent.
22. Several organizations, known as civil societies, which were not associated with
any federal or state govermnent, were formed in Chiapas at that time, including, inter alia, the
civil society known as "Las Abejas" ("The Bees").
23. Las Abejas was, and remained at all relevant times, a pacifist organization not
afiliated with the Mexican Govermnent. Due to its pacifst nature, Las Abejas was also opposed
to the EZLN, which advocated violence as a means to its ends.
24. A large majority of the residents of Acteal, including the Decedents and the
Plaintifs, were members of Las Abejas and flly ascribed to its non-violent, pacifist practices.
25. On or about January 2, 1994, regular Mexican Army units moved into Chiapas
and engaged in armed confontation with EZLN forces.
26. Shortly thereafer, the Mexican Govermnent under then-President Carlos Salinas
de Gortari ("Salinas") entered into peace negotiations with the EZLN. Salinas declared a
unilateral cease-fire and ofered amnesty to those EZLN members who chose to reintegrate into
society. The peace negotiations between the Mexican Govermnent, under Salinas, and the EZLN
resulted in the Mexican Goverment passing an Amnesty Law that became effective on January,
22 1994.
11
Defendant Zedillo Becomes President ofMexico
27. On August 21, 1994, Defendant Zedillo, was elected President of Mexico.
28. The transition period between the Salinas administration and Defendant Zedillo's
incoming administation was August 21, 1994 to December 1, 1 994.
29. On December 1, 1994, Defendant Zedillo was swor into ofice as the President
of Mexico.
Plan de Campana Chiapas '94
30. In or about December 1994, soon afer Defendant Zedillo was swor in, a military
campaign plan was adopted with the aim of suppressing the EZLN, as well as all political and
military support for that organization in Chiapas (hereinafer, "Plan de Campana Chiapas '94").
A certified translation as well as an apostilled and certified copy of a document outlining the
Plan de Campana Chiapas '94, along with excerts of the Mexican Senate Record incorporating
same, as introduced in the Senate of the United States of Mexico on or about December 14,
2010, is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Composite Exhibit "1" (the
"Senate Record").
31. The Chiapas campaign contemplated in the Plan de Campana Chiapas '94 was
divided into four designated phases: Preparation Phase, Ofense Phase, Development Phase, and
Final Phase. See Plan de Campana Chiapas '94 incorporated as part of Senate Record at 22658-
59 (the page numbers are located on the top right hand comer of that document).
32. The Preparation Phase focused on the organization, training and deployment of
both military and civilian forces that would participate in the Chiapas campaign. Detailed
operational plans for the campaign were to be prepared during this phase. [d. at 22658.
12
33. The Ofense Phase focused on the eradication, dispersal and expulsion of EZLN
military forces from Chiapas, as well as the subsequent occupation of Chiapas by military and
police forces. ld
34. The Offense Phase contemplated the application of the principle of war involving
concentration of military forces in areas ofChiapas under EZLN control. Id at 22667.
35. In applying this philosophy, certain operational aspects of the Offense Phase
included the suspension of civil rights in Chiapas, including:
a. Forced displacement of civilian populations in EZLN-controlled areas to areas
under Mexican Goverment control;
b. Neutralization of the organization and activities of the diocese of San Cristobal de
las Casas;
c. Capture and detention of "Mexican [nationals] identifed with the EZLN;"
d. Capture and expulsion of "pericious foreigners;"
e. Prohibition of commercial flights into EZLN-controlled areas;
f. Censorship of mass media;
g. Destruction or control of equine and/or bovine herds;
h. Destruction of crops and harvests;
1. Deployment of paramilitary and civilian self-defense forces; and
J.
Suspension of communications in EZLN-contolled areas, including mail,
telephone and telegraph service. ld at 22667-68.
36. The Development Phase focused on the elimination of remammg EZLN
operational nuclei, as well as the prevention of the retur of EZLN forces that had been
previously expelled from Chiapas. Id at 22658.
1 3
37. Part of the Plan de Campana Chiapas '94 encompassed efforts to create, train, and
support self-defense forces and other paramilitary entities which would assist in military
operations during both the Offense and Development Phases. ld at 22663, 22668.
38. The Final Phase focused on continued support to local organizations and
authorities to enable them to carry out self-defense operations against the EZLN. ld at 22659.
39. When applied, the Plan de Campana Chiapas '94 violated the Mexican
Constitution, the laws of Mexico, interational treaties and accords, and customary interational
law.
40. On or about January 4, 1998, the weekly publication Proceso first revealed the
existence of the Plan de Campana Chiapas '94 (the "Proceso Article"). Excerpts of a certified
and apostilled copy as well as a certified translation of the Proceso Article is attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "2".
41. On or about January 6, 1998, the Secretariat of National Defense (the Mexican
Department of Defense) issued a statement denying the existence of the Plan de Campana
Chiapas '94 referred to in the Proceso Article. A copy and a certified translation of an article in
La Jorada periodical dated January 6, 1998 reflecting same is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference as Exhibit "3".
Defendant Zedilo Terminates the Chiapas Peace Process
42. Due to mismanagement of the economy during the last year of the Salinas
Administration, on December 20, 1994, Treasury Secretary Jaime Serra Puche announced the
devaluation of the peso, driving the Mexican economy into crisis. The Mexican Goverent
promptly commenced efforts to obtain bail-out funds fom the United States of America and the
Interational Monetary Fund.
14
43. Defendant Zedillo decided to terminate the peace process before he even took
offce. In May 1994, when only a candidate for the ofce of the presidency, Zedillo censured
Manuel Camacho, the Peace Commissioner for Chiapas. Camacho was the Federal
Goverent's representative for the peace negotiation between the Mexican Goverent and the
EZLN. Faced with Zedillo's censure, Camacho had no choice but to resign his post, doing so on
or about June 16, 1994. Aferwads, in a public letter, Camacho stated that his resignation was
the product of Zedillo' s decision to denounce the peace process, characterizing it as a failure.
Camacho indicated that "[there exist] two different political paths to achieve peace in Chiapas."
One path, that of negotiation, "consists in creating those conditions that avoid the dynamics of
wa." The other path, Zedillo's choice, "involves wearing down the rebel movement, misleading
public opinion and renouncing time and again its offers and public compromises." An apostilled
original and certified translation of Camacho's letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein
as Composite Exhihit "4."
44. On or about January 13, 1 995, Riordan Roett, at the time Chase Manhattan
Bank's consultant on Latin America's emerging markets, authored an interal memorandum
entitled "Political Update on Mexico" (the "Roett Memo"). A copy of the Roett Memo is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "5".
45. The Roett Memo stated, inter alia:
Until the administration of President Eresto Zedillo identifies the appropriate
policies to stabilize the peso and avoid uncontolled inflation, it will be almost
impossible to address issues such as Chiapas and judicial and electoral reform.
***
There are three areas in which the current monetary crisis can undermine political
stability in Mexico. The first i Chiapas; the second in [sic] the upcoming state
elections; and the third is the role of the labor unions, their relationship to the
goverment and the govering PRI [Partido Revolucionario Institucional ("PRJ"),
15
one of Mexico's two largest political parties, which dominated Mexican national
politics for approximately 70 years up to 1994. Zedillo was a member of PRI].
***
Moreover, to the degree that the monetary crisis limits the resources available to
the goverent for social and economic reforms, it may prove diffcult to win
popular support for the Zedillo administration's plans for Chiapas. More relevant,
[Sub-corander] Marcos and his supporters may decide to embarrass the
goverent with an increase in local violence and force the administration to cede
to Zapatista [EZLN] demands and accept an embarrassing political defeat. The
alterative is a military ofensive to defeat the insurgency which would create
an interational outcry over the use of violence and the suppression of
indigenous rights.
While Chiapas, in our opinion, does not pose afundamental threat to Meican
political stabilit, it is perceived to be so by many in the investment communit.
The goverment will need to eliminate the Zapatistas to demonstrate their
efective control ofthe national territor and ofsecurit policy.
*.*
The Mexican monetary crisis has overshadowed the commitment of the Zedillo
administration to a new wave of political reforms that include political
negotiations to resolve the Chiapas crisis and to guarantee fair elections at the
state and municipal levels.
(Emphasis added.)
46. On or about February 1, 1995, the Roett Memo was leaked to the press. A copy
of an article of that same date in the periodical Counter punch first disclosing the existence and
contents of the Roett Memo and a copy of a March 24, 1995 aicle in the National Catholic
Reporter regarding the Roett Memo are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as
Composite Exhibit "6".
47. Within days of the issuance of the Roett Memo, Defendant Zedillo terminated
peace negotiations between the EZLN and the Mexican Goverent, begun under the previous
Salinas administration, and unsuccessfully attempted to arrest EZLN leader Marcos, referring to
16
him as a seditious traitor. These steps were viewed as a betrayal by the goverment, creating
frther conflict in the region and markedly increasing the distrust between the parties.
48. Thereafer, in or about February 1995, the Mexican Goverent, using police and
military forces, implemented the Plan de Campana Cbiapas '94 and commenced a military
campaign, including the eradication, dispersal and expulsion of EZLN military forces fom
Chiapas, as well as the suppression of all political and civilian entities perceived to be
sympathetic to the EZLN.
49. In or about February of 1995, Chiapas was declared a military zone, and Mexican
Army troops were deployed into its territory.
50. As a consequence of mismanagement of the economy during 1 994 and of the
1 995 economic crisis and the devaluation of the Mexican peso, the armed conflict in Chiapas
intensified. The social infastructure of Cbiapas was also weakened as a result of mass
migration. The Mexican Senate found that the political and economic policies of Defendant
Zedillo's administration drove over 15 million Mexicans into extreme poverty and caused over
fve million Mexicans to emigate to the United States.
51. In or about 1 996, a special federal cabinet was formed to address the confict in
Chiapas (the "Special Chiapas Cabinet").
52. The Special Chiapas Cabinet included Defendant Zedillo; the Secretary of
Defense; the Goveror of the State of Chiapas; the Director General of the Center for Research
and National Security ("CISEN"); the Commissioner for the Peace Dialogue; the Secretary of
Interior, Emilio Chuayffet ("Chuayffet"); and the Federal Solicitor General and Attorey
General, Jorge Madrazo Cuellar.
1 7
Defendant Zedilo's Administration Arms and Supports Anti-EZLN Vilagers In Chiapas
53. As part of the Plan de Campana Chiapas '94, Defendant Zedillo's administration
pursued a policy whereby members of villages in Chiapas opposed to the EZLN (the "Anti
EZLN Villagers") were allowed to obtain military-caliber automatic and semi-automatic
weapons (the "Assault Rifes") directly or indirectly fom members of the Mexican Army or
other persons or groups acting in concert with the Mexican Army.
54. Anti-EZLN Villagers also received training and support from members of the
Mexican Army stationed in Chiapas. Anti-EZLN Villagers were allowed to openly carry the
Assault Rifes.
55. Mexican law prohibits civilians fom owning or possessing Assault Rifles. The
arming of Anti-EZLN Villagers with Assault Rifles and training them to use those weapons
violated Mexican law.
56. Although many Anti-EZLN Villagers openly displayed Assault Rifles in public,
law enforcement authorities ofentimes took no action, despite these clear violations of Mexican
law. When police oficers did occasionally seize Assault Rifles from Anti-EZLN Villagers,
those weapons were eventually retued to the same Anti-EZLN Villagers.
57. The goal of allowing Anti-EZLN Villagers to engage in such conduct with
impunity was to suppress and intimidate villages purortedly sympathetic to the EZLN, and to
coerce those villages to oppose the EZLN.
58. The increase in paramilitary activities of Anti-EZLN Villagers in a particular area
coincided with the arrival and embedding of Mexican Army units in that area, a well as the
training of Anti-EZLN Villagers by those Mexican Army units, pursuant to the Plan de Campana
Chiapas '94. A copy of a report reflecting same that was directed to the U.S. Defense
18
Intelligence Agency ("DIA"), dated May 5, 1 999 (the "May 1 999 DIA Report") and declassified
in February 2008 pursuant to Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") Request No. 38,435, is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "7".
59. In or about mid-1 997, armed Anti-EZLN Villagers commenced a terror campaign,
including a series of kidnappings and homicides, many in towns throughout about one-fourth of
Chiapas, including within the municipality of ChenalhO.
60. Many residents in the affected villages supported neither the policies of
Defendant Zedillo' s administration nor the armed conflict espoused by the EZLN. As a result of
the kidnappings and murders orchestrated by Anti-EZLN Villagers, many residents of these
affected villages fed to Acteal and other villages.
61 . Between approximately May and December 1997, many villagers from towns and
communities around Acteal were displaced due to the conflict in Chiapas. Many of these
displaced villagers were members of or were affiliated with Las Abejas, and fed to Acteal.
62. On September 30, 1997, the inhabitants of Chenalh6 delivered a letter to
Defendant Zedillo, Chiapas State Goveror Julio Cesar Ruiz Ferro, and other members of the
Mexican Goverent (the "September 30 Demand"). A certified translation as well as a
certified copy of the September 30 Demand is attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference as Composite Exhibit "8".
63. In the September 30 Demand, the inhabitants of ChenalhO reported a string of
attacks and kidnappings, specifically complaining that Anti-EZLN Villagers were being allowed
to possess and openly carry Assault Rifles in violation of Mexican law. The inhabitants of
Chenalh6 demanded that the law be enforced.
1 9
64. On October 18, 1997, Msgr. Raul Vera-Lopez, Coadjutor Bishop of the diocese of
San Cristobal de las Casas, drafed a letter directed to Interior Secretary Chuayffet informing him
of the incidents of violence and the fact that Anti-EZLN Villagers and other paramilitary groups
were being trained and provided with weapons (the "Vera Letter"). In the Vera Letter, Bishop
Vera-Lopez also waed Defendant Zedillo that "a bloodbath" was imminent. A certified
translation a well a an apostilled and certifed copy of the Vera Letter is attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference as Composite Exhibit "9".
65. Bishop Vera-Lopez delivered the Vera Letter to Chuayffet, who personally hand-
delivered that letter to Defendant Zedillo, before the Acteal Massacre.
66. On or about December 7, 1997, Televisa nationally televised a special news report
prepared by Ricardo Rocha regarding the condition of displaced civilians around Acteal, caused
by violence attributed to counter-insurgency activities of Anti-EZLN Villagers.
67. On December 2 1, 1997, a group of displaced villagers who had sought refuge in
Acteal called for the aid of Mexican legislators who were visiting the nearby town of Polho. The
displaced villagers advised the legislators that members of their communities were being held
against their will by Anti-EZLN Villagers and other paramilitay groups. These villagers frther
advised the legislators that they were under imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.
The Acteal Massacre
68. News regarding increasing violence fomented by Anti-EZLN Villagers and other
paramilitary groups in Chiapas, brought by displaced persons seeking refuge in Acteal, caused
grave concer to the residents of Acteal.
20

69. As a result of this news, on or about December 20, 1 997, most of the residents of
Acteal, who were also members of Las Abejas, held a retreat in and around the small chapel
located within Acteal proper (the "Acteal Chapel") to pray and fast as a community.
70. The retreat in the Acteal Chapel was held in the name of peace and the hope for
an end to the violence in Chiapas. Over 350 people attended the retreat.
71. On December 22, 1997, Anti-EZLN Villagers from surrounding villages, armed
with Assault Rifles, arrived at Acteal. Many of the Anti-EZLN Villagers wore red bandanas to
identif themselves to each other.
72. Accompanying the Anti-EZLN Villagers arriving at Acteal were individuals who
spoke only Spanish, had crew-cut style haircuts, and wore uniforms of the local police and/or the
Mexican Army. These persons appeared to be directing, coordinating, acting in concert with,
and/or aiding and abetting the activities of the Anti-EZLN Villagers. At that time, there were no
peace-keeping operations being conducted in the area around Acteal.
73. At approximately 10:30 a.m. on December 22, 1997, the Anti-EZLN Villagers
encircled the perimeter of Acteal and began firing on its residents.
74. As the Anti-EZLN Villagers shrank the perimeter, they concentrated their fre on
the residents of Acteal, who were praying and fasting at their reteat in the Acteal Chapel.
75. Fearing for their lives, many of the residents of Acteal were able to escape
through the perimeter and fee into the countryside.
76. Anti-EZLN Villagers pursued the escaping Acteal residents and continued fring
upon the villagers, killing or injuring many of them.
77. Although both Mexican Army and local police units were in the vicinity of Acteal
and could hear the gunshots fred by the Anti-EZLN Villagers throughout the Acteal Massacre,
21
local police units did not enter Acteal, to recover the bodies of the dead or dying, until
approximately 12:30 a.m. on December 23, 1 997, some 14 hours afer the massacre had begun.
78. By that time, the Anti-EZLN Villagers and supporting personnel had lef Acteal.
79. The Acteal Massacre crime scene was not maintained for investigation.
80. All told, the Anti-EZLN Villagers slaughtered 45 residents of Acteal, including
seven adult males, twenty adult females (four of whom, on information and belief, were
pregnant), and eighteen minors, one of them a toddler. A copy of a report directed to the DIA
and summarizing the Acteal Massacre, prepared soon thereafer (the "December 1997 DIA
Report"), declassified in February 2008 pursuant to FOIA Request No. 38,435, is attached hereto
and incororated herein by reference as Exhibit "10".
81. Additionally, 17 other Acteal residents were wounded as a result of the massacre.
82. Among those slain by the Anti-EZLN Villagers and/or supporting personnel were
Decedents Richard Roe I, Mary Roe I and Mary Roe 2.
83. Among those wounded by the Anti-EZLN Villagers and/or supporting personnel
were Jane Doe 2, John Doe 2, and John Doe 3. Specifically:
a. Plaintiff Jane Doe 2 [was physically injured as a result of the Acteal
Massacre];
b. Plaintiff John Doe 2 [was physically injured as a result of the Acteal
Massacre]; and
c. Plaintiff John Doe 3 [was physically injured as a result of the Acteal
Massacre].
22
84. Among those fired upon by the Anti-EZLN Villagers and/or their supporting
personnel, but who escaped immediate physical injury, were Plaintiffs Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 3,
Jane Doe 4, John Doe I, John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6.
Zedillo's Conduct During the Acteal Massacre
85. On December 22, 1997, the Director General of CIS EN (the Center for Research
and National Security) and, thereafer, Chuayffet personally notified Defendant Zedillo of the
Acteal Massacre while it was in progress.
86. Defendant Zedillo was taping a Christmas message to the nation at the time when
he was notified of the Acteal Massacre, causing him to interrupt taping for a period of time.
87. Notwithstanding, the Acteal Massacre continued unabated for hours.
88. Afer finishing taping his Christmas message, Defendant Zedillo met with Felipe
Calderon, then the leader of the opposition party, Partido de Action Nacional (the "PAN"), and
currently the President of Mexico. A certified translation as well as an apostilled and certified
copy of Defendant Zedillo' s agenda for December 22, 1997, is attached hereto and incororated
herein by reference as Composite Exhibit "11".
The Cover-Up
89. In order to hide his complicity and liability for the Acteal Massacre, Defendant
Zedillo, along with Jorge Madrao Cuellar, the Solicitor General and Attorey General of
Mexico ("Madrazo"), and other individuals known and unknown to Plaintifs, and other
members of the Mexican Goverment including, inter alia, individual members and/or agents of
one or more subdivisions, instumentalities and/or agencies of Zedillo's goverent,
orchestrated and participated in a conspiracy to cover up any connection to, responsibility for,
involvement with, or participation in the Acteal Massacre (the "Cover-Up").
23
90. Following the Acteal Massacre, both national and interational media arrived at
Acteal to cover the scene. Defendant Zedillo and Madrazo initially represented to the press that
the Acteal Massacre was nothing more than a local, inter-community dispute.
91. In frtherance of the Cover-Up, 128 persons from the area surrounding Acteal
were arrested at the direction of the PGR (Procuraduria General de la Republica), the Attorey
General's Ofice for the Republic of Mexico, the agency that led the investigation and
prosecutions relating to the Acteal Massacre. Madrazo was director ofPGR at the time.
n. In or about 1 998, the PGR issued the Libra Blanco Sabre Acteal (Wite Book on
Acteal, or the "White Book"), a publication which set forth the position of the Mexican
Goverent purporting to finally resolve, settle, and put to rest all issues relating to the Acteal
Massacre. (The White Book is too voluminous to file as an exhibit at this time. Plaintiffs
possess a copy and will produce and/or file it upon request.)
93. In the White Book, the PGR attributed the causes of the Acteal Massacre to, inter
alia, (a) local, inter-community disputes; (b) the continued existence and operations of the
EZLN; and (c) a lack of competent local judicial, administrative and law enforcement
infrastructure in Chiapas. See White Book at 99.
The Plan de Campana Chiapas '94 is Disclosed to the Public
94. Although the existence of the Plan de Campana Chiapas '94 had been the subject
of news articles since 1 998, its existence was denied for years by the Secretariat of National
Defense.
95. In February 2008, both the December 1997 DIA Report and the May 1 999 DIA
Report, previously classified as secret documents, were declassified under FOIA Request No.
38,435. The DIA reports are attached to and incorporated by reference in the April 7, 201 1
24
report submitted by the Chiapas Special Prosecutor's Office for the Acteal Case, entitled Balance
de Situacion ("Summary of the Situation"). (This report is too voluminous to file as an exhibit at
this time. Plaintifs possess a copy and will file and/or produce it upon request.)
96. The declassification of the December 1 997 DIA Report and the May 1999 DIA
Report confirmed the de facto involvement of members and/or personnel of the Mexican Army,
and/or persons or groups acting in coordination with or under the contol and protection of the
Mexican Army, in the training and arming of Anti-EZLN Villagers.
97. On or about December 14, 2010, the contents of the Plan de Campafia Chiapas
'94 became part of the Mexican Senate Record, when incorporated into a legislative resolution
stipulating that frther investigation into the Acteal Massacre was required. See Exhibit 1 .
98. On information and belief, the Secretariat of National Defense has, to date, not
commented on the introduction into the Senate Record of the Plan de Campaa Chiapas '94.
Investigation ofthe Acteal Massacre by the Chiapas Special Prosecutor
99. On or about December 22, 2007, Attorey Noe Maza was nominated by the state
goverent of Chiapas as special prosecutor for the purpose of investigating the Acteal
Massacre (the "Chiapas Special Prosecutor").
I 00. Shortly afer his appointment as Chiapas Special Prosecutor, Mr. Maza was
ordered by Amador Rodriguez, the Chiapas Minister of Justice, to not take the testimony of
Defendant Zedillo, Chuayffett, or Liebano Saenz, Defendant Zedillo' s chief of staff at the time
of the Acteal Massacre ("Saenz").
1 01 . On information and belief, notwithstanding the order to the contrary, Mr. Maza
continued in his efforts to take the testimony of Defendant Zedillo, Chuayffett, and Saenz. Mr.
Maza was unsuccessful in this regard.
25
102. In or about July 2008, Mr. Maza held a press conference announcing that it was
possible that some of the alleged perpetrators of the Acteal Massacre could be innocent of the
crimes for which they were charged and ultimately convicted.
1 03. Shortly afer this press conference, Mr. Maza was relieved of his duties as
Chiapas Special Prosecutor. A certified translation as well as an apostilled and certified copy of
a September 7, 2008 article in La Jornada reflecting this fact is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference as Composite Exhibit " 12".
The Decision ofThe Supreme Judicial Court ofMexico
I 04. On October 4, 2007, over 34 persons were convicted of various crimes arising
from the Acteal massacre, including culpable homicide, aggravated battery, possession or
carrying of weapons of restricted and/or military use, and other violations of Mexican law
relating to weapons and explosives, and were sentenced to 26 years' incarceration. Not less than
20 of those convicted were innocent of any wrongdoing in connection with the Acteal Massacre.
1 05. On or about August 1 2, 2009, the Supreme Judicial Court of Mexico (the
"Supreme Court") entered a decision determining that the arrests and convictions of 20
individuals resulting fom the PGR's prosecution of the Acteal Massacre had violated Mexican
criminal procedure, criminal law and constitutional due process, and were released from prison
(the "Supreme Court Decision"). Another six were granted new trials due to those violations.
1 06. In the Supreme Court Decision, the Supreme Court found, inter alia, that:
a. There were materially significant discrepancies in testimony between and
among victims regarding both the appearance and clothing of the alleged perpetrators of
the Acteal Massacre, Supreme Court Decision, Juicio de Amparo Directo No. 39/2008
Folio 280.
26
b. There were material retractions of testimony which could have exonerated
one or more defendants in the prosecution of the Acteal Massacre. Id.
c. Prosecution witnesses, who could not identify many of the alleged
peretrators of the Acteal Massacre during their initial declarations, later confessed that
the Federal Judicial Police provided them with a list of the names and villages of
residence of those alleged perpetrators afer those witnesses had provided their initial
declarations. It was then that these prosecution witnesses supplemented their initial
declaations with additional details including the names and communities ofthose alleged
perpetrators, within 12 hours of the initial declarations in many instances. Acteal
Massacre, Supreme Court Decision, Juicio de Amparo Directo No. 9/2008 Folio 237, af
reverso, hasta 239.
d. The Federal Judicial Police obtained a book of photographs used for
identification of the accused, prior to the arrest of those individuals and prior to ay
victim identifying the persons whose photographs were contained in that book. That
photographic evidence was obtained for the intentional purpose of altering the testimony
of witnesses to identif and implicate the persons in the photographs as the alleged
perpetators of the Acteal Massacre. Acteal Massacre, Supreme Court Decision, Juicio
de Amparo Directo No. 10/2008 Folio 278.
e. The PGR illegally obtained and formulated evidence for the purpose of
convicting the alleged perpetrators of the Acteal Massacre. Acteal Massacre, Supreme
Court Decision, Juicio de Amparo Directo No. 1012008 Folio 275.
f Defendants in the prosecution of the Acteal Massacre were denied their
constitutional right to a live face-to-face confrontation of those prosecution witnesses
27
who had previously given declarations implicating those defendants. Acteal Massacre,
Supreme Court Decision, Juicio de Amparo Directo No. 1 0/200S Folio 2S0.
g. The PGR misrepresented the dates and proceedings corresponding to
various witness declarations used as substantive evidence, in order to obtain guilty
verdicts, in direct violation of Mexican criminal procedure. Acteal Massacre, Supreme
Court Decision, Juicio de Amparo Directo No. 1 01200S Folio 255.
1 07. As a result of the Supreme Court Decision, the convictions of 20 defendants were
reversed and those defendants were released from prison afer I I years of incarceration.
Conduct ofthe Elements ofthe Meican Army Stationed In Chiapas
Since the Acteal Massacre
l OS. Despite the Acteal Massacre on December 22, 1 997, elements of the Mexican
Army stationed in Chiapas have continued to a and support Anti-EZLN Villagers as part of
the Plan de Campana Chiapas '94.
1 09. On information and belief, between 1 997 and the present, Anti-EZLN Villagers,
elements of the Mexican Army, and the police have continued to engage in sum ary executions,
detentions, and forced displacement of members of indigenous communities in Chiapas,
notwithstanding the subsequent changes in administrations and the Supreme Court Decision.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
1 1 0. The acts described herein were carried out under actual or apparent authority or
color of law of the Mexican Goverent. Defendant Zedillo bears responsibility for exercising
command responsibility over, ordering, engaging in a joint criminal enterprise with, conspiring
with, and/or aiding and abetting other members of the Mexican Goverent including, inter alia,
individual members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities and/or agencies
2S
Case 3:11-cv-01433-AWT Document 1-1 Filed 09/16/11 Page 1 of 25
of that goverent, to carry out and/or participate In the Acteal Massacre, a well as the
subsequent Cover-Up.
I l l . Defendant Zedillo knew or should have known about the events leading up to the
Acteal Massacre, as well as the human rights abuses committed during the Acteal Massacre.
1 1 2. The extrajudicial killings and attempted extrajudicial killings inflicted upon the
Decedents and the Plaintiffs formed part of a widespread patter and practice of systematic
human rights violations committed against the civilian population of Chiapas by members and/or
agents of one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities andlor agencies of the Mexican
Goverent.
1 1 3. Defendant Zedillo exercised command responsibility over, conspired, andlor
acted in concert, directly andlor indirectly, with various members andlor agents of one or more
subdivisions, instumentalities andlor agencies of the Mexican Goverent to commit
extrajudicial killings, attempted extrajudicial killings, war crimes, crimes against humanity,
cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, terror and violence to violate feedom of association,
and terror and violence to violate feedom of thought, political opinion and feedom to exercise
the political franchise. In addition to being personally liable for his own actions, Defendant
Zedillo is jointly and severally liable for the actions of various members andlor agents of one or
more subdivisions, instrumentalities andlor agencies of the Mexican Goverent, all of which
were actions undertaken in furtherance of a common plan, design and scheme to commit human
rights abuses against the civilian population of Chiapas, including the Acteal Massacre and the
subsequent Cover-Up.
1 14. Defendant Zedillo knew or should have known that his actions and omissions
would assist in these abuses at a time when he exercised command responsibility over, ordered,
29
and/or aided and abetted those members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions,
instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexican Goverent who participated directly or
indirectly in the Acteal Massacre and the Cover-Up. In addition to being personally liable for his
own actions, Defendant Zedillo is jointly and severally liable for the actions of those he
exercised command responsibility over, ordered, and/or aided and abetted.
1 1 5. Defendant Zedillo knew or should have known that his subordinates were
committing human rights abuses, and he failed to prevent the abuses or punish those responsible.
1 1 6. Defendant Zedillo also engaged in a j oint criminal enterprise with members
and/or agents of one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexican
Goverent who carried out the Acteal Massacre to commit extrajudicial killings, attempted
extrajudicial killings, war crimes, crimes against humanity, cruel, inhuman and degrading
violate freedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political franchise.
1 1 7. The extrajudicial killings, attempted extrajudicial killings, war crimes, crimes
freedom of association and terror and violence to violate feedom of thought, political opinion
and freedom to exercise the political franchise committed during the Acteal Massacre were part
of an organized system of repression against the civilian population of Chiapas. Defendant
Zedillo had kowledge of, exercised command responsibility over, ordered, and/or was a
participant in this system of repression against the civilian population of Chiapas. I was
Defendant Zedillo' s intent to frther this system of repression.
1 1 8. The extrajudicial killings, attempted extrajudicial killings, war crimes, cnmes
30
freedom of association and teror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion
and freedom to exercise the political franchise committed during the Acteal Massacre were
foreseeable consequences of a common, shared intent by Defendant Zedillo and various
members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities and/or agencies of the
Mexican Goverent to frther the system of repression against Chiapas' civilian population.
1 1 9. The acts and omissions were outside the scope of Defendant Zedillo' s lawful
authority and were not authorized by interational or Mexican law.
Equitable Toling ofthe Statute ofLimitations
120. The Statute of Limitations was equitably tolled through August 12, 2009.
1 21 . Plaintifs could not have brought their lawsuit in the United States against
Defendant Zedillo prior to the date when the Supreme Court Decision was published.
122. Specifically, the Supreme Court Decision de facto finally recognized that
Defendant Zedillo and other members of the Mexican Goverent including, inter alia,
individual members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities and/or agencies
of said goverent, including Madrazo, had orchestrated and participated in the Cover-Up.
1 23. Immediately afer the Acteal Massacre, Defendant Zedillo, Madrazo and others
knowingly and falsely represented to the press that the atrocity was merely a local, inter
community dispute in which the Mexican Goverent had played no part.
124. In furtherance of the Cover-Up, the PGR, under Madrazo' s direction, arrested
over 1 28 persons and falsely charged them for the Acteal Massacre. Of these, none were the
Anti-EZLN Villagers but, rather, local politicians and residents of villages surrounding Acteal
and members of the local police force.
31
1 25. As set forth in the Supreme Court Decision, in prosecuting those accused of
having committed the Acteal Massacre, the PGR obviously, blatantly and/or egregiously violated
Mexican criminal procedure, criminal law and constitutional due process, which should have
been prohibited by the Mexican Federal Court in Chiapas, but were not.
1 26. On or about October 4, 2007, as a result of the Mexican Federal Court in Chiapas
having permitted those procedural, legal and constitutional violations, at least 20 innocent people
were falsely convicted of crimes committed during the Acteal Massacre and sentenced to 26
years of incarceration.
127. Those falsely convicted persons were incarcerated from their initial arrests II
1998 until fnally released in August 2009, upon publication of the Supreme Court Decision.
128. That miscarriage of justice by the PGR, among others, was evidenced by the
PGR's publication of the White Book under color of law, which represented the official position
of the PGR and the Mexican Goverent, purporting to fnally resolve, settle, and put to rest all
issues relating to the Acteal Massacre.
1 29. The Cover-Up was frthered when Noe Maa, the newly appointed Chiapas
Special Prosecutor, was prohibited fom obtaining the testimony of Defendant Zedillo, Saenz and
Chuayffett, and was then relieved of his position in or about July 2008 when he made statements
contrary to the White Book's fndings, declaring that some of the alleged perpetrators of the
Acteal Massacre could have been innocent.
1 30. The Cover-Up was finally brought to light by the Supreme Court Decision which,
for the first time, held that the PGR had committed procedural, legal and constitutional violations
in the prosecution of the Acteal Massacre and thereby confrmed that, contray to the White
Book's findings, those responsible, including Zedillo, had not been brought to justice.
32
1 31 . Moreover, the 2008 declassification of the December 1 997 D1A Report and the
May 1 999 D1A Report confirmed for the frst time the de facto involvement of members and/or
personnel of the Mexican Army, or persons or groups acting in coordination with the Mexican
Army, or under its control and protection, in the training and arming of the Anti-EZLN Villagers.
132. Furthermore, since 1 997, and continuing to the present time, Anti-EZLN
Villagers, elements of the Mexican Army, and the police have consistently engaged in sum ary
executions, detentions, and forced displacement of members of indigenous communities in
Chiapas. These actions have had the intended effect of creating an atmosphere of such extreme
fear and intimidation that Plaintifs have been traumatized and unable to pursue their claims. In
fact, Plaintiffs continue to fear for their lives and personal safety and must bring these claims
anonymously.
1 33. For the aforementioned reasons, August 1 2, 2009 is the date upon which the
Statute of Limitations commenced to run.
Absence andor Exhaustion ofLegal Remedies in Mexico
1 34. The complexity of the Cover-Up, including the arrest and conviction of 34
persons, the subsequent publication of the White Book, the denial of the existence of the Plan de
Campafia Chiapas '94 by the Secretariat of National Defense, and the longevity of the Cover-Up,
confirmed that neither the justice system nor law enforcement in Mexico would protect the rights
of the victims of the Acteal Massacre, including the Plaintiffs and Decedents, provide
appropriate remedies for same, or bring to justice those truly responsible for that atrocity.
1 35. The absence of adequate legal remedies for the Plaintiffs and Decedents II
Mexico was frther confirmed by the promotion to appellate judge of the presiding judge of the
Mexican Federal Court in Chiapas, notwithstanding the prior Supreme Court Decision finding
33
that that judge wrongflly permitted the POR to commit obvious, blatant and/or egregious
violations of Mexican criminal procedure, criminal law and constitutional due process.
1 36. Furthermore, Plaintiffs brought legal proceedings in Mexico against Defendant
Zedillo and others for, inter alia, their responsibility for the Acteal Massacre and sought
damages. Those proceedings were dismissed and the dismissal was affirmed on appeal .
Plaintiffs have therefore exhausted all legal remedies in Mexico.
137. As a result of the evident lack of protection afforded by the Mexican justice
system or civil authorities as set forth above, Plaintiffs to this day remain in fear of reprisals
against themselves or their families due to their participation in this lawsuit and, as such, must
proceed under pseudonyms.
1 38. As such, t o the extent that they did exist, legal remedies available t o Plaintiffs and
Decedents in Mexico were "inetIective, unobtainable, unduly prolonged, inadequate, or
obviously ftile." S.Rep. No. 1 02-249 at 9-10.
MISCELLANEOUS
1 39. All conditions precedent to the institution of this action have occurred, have been
performed, or have been waived.
1 40. Plaintiffs have retained undersigned counsel in this action and have obligated
themselves to pay them a reasonable fee.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
Count !
Etrajudicial Killng
1 41 . Plaintiffs Jane Doe 1 , Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3 and John Doe 1 , John Doe 2, John
Doe 3, and John Doe 6 reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth in
paragraphs I through 140 as if flly set forth herein.
34
142. The extajudicial killings of Decedents Richard Roe I, Mary Roe I , and Mary
Roe 2 constitute extrajudicial killings a defined by the Torture Victim Protection Act, Pub. L.
No. 1 02-256, 1 06 Stat. 73 (1 992) (codified at 28 U .S.C. 1 350 Note). Additionally, the killings
constitute "tort[s] . . . committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United
States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1 350, in that they are in violation of
customary interational law prohibiting extrajudicial killings as reflected, expressed, defined and
codified in multilateral teaties and other interational instruments, interational and domestic
judicial decisions and other authorities.
143. The extrajudicial killings of the Decedents were not authorized by a judgment
pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all judicial guaranties which are
recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
144. Defendant Zedillo exercised command responsibility over, ordered, conspired
with, acted in concert with, engaged in a joint criminal enterprise with, and/or aided and abetted,
directly and/or indirectly, various members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions,
instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexican Goverent who carried out the Acteal
Massacre, including the extrajudicial killings of the Decedents.
145. The Decedents sustained pain and suffering and bodily injuries causing death as a
result of the extrajudicial killings.
1 46. Defendant Zedillo's acts or omissions described above, and the acts committed by
various members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities and/or agencies of
the Mexican Goverent who carried out the Acteal Massacre, caused the extrajudicial killings
of the Decedents and caused Plaintifs to suffer severe mental pain and suffering.
35
the Mexican Goverent, were committed under actual or apparent authority or color of law of
the Mexican Goverent.
148. As a result of the extrajudicial killings of the Decedents, Plaintiffs Jane Doe 1 ,
Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, John Doe 1 , John Doe 2, John Doe 3, and John Doe 6, in their individual
capacities and in their capacities as next-of-kin of the Decedents are entitled to damages in an
amount to be determined at trial.
149. Defendant Zedillo' s acts or omiSSIOns were deliberate, willful, intentional,
wanton, malicious and oppressive, and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in
an amount to be deterined at tial.
Count I
Attempted Extrajudicial Killing Causing Injuries
(Plaintif Jane Doe 2)
1 50. Plaintiff Jane Doe 2 realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 140 as iffully set forth herein.
l SI . The attempted extrajudicial killing of Plaintif Jane Doe 2 constitutes an attempt
to commit an extrajudicial killing as defned by the Torture Victim Protection Act, Pub. L. No.
1 02-256, 1 06 Stat. 73 (1 992) (codified at 28 U.S.C. 1350 Note). Additionally, the attempted
extrajudicial killing constitutes a "tort . . . commited in violation of the law of nations or a treaty
of the United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1 350, in that it is in violation
of customary interational law prohibiting extrajudicial killings as refected, expressed, defined
and codified in multilateral treaties and other interational instruments, interational and
domestic judicial decisions and other authorities.
36
1 52. The attempted extrajudicial killing of Jane Doe 2 was not authorized by a
judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all judicial guaranties which are
Massacre, including the attempted extrajudicial killing of Jane Doe 2.
1 54. As a result of the attempted extrajudicial killing, Plaintiff Jane Doe 2 sustained
pain and suffering and bodily injuries.
the Mexican Goverment who carried out the Acteal Massacre, caused the attempted
extrajudicial killing of Jane Doe 2 and caused her to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
suffering.
1 57. As a result of the attempts to kill her extrajudicially, Plaintif Jane Doe 2 is
entitled to damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
37
1 58. Defendant Zedillo' s acts or omiSSIOns were deliberate, willfl, intentional,
wanton, malicious and oppressive, and should be puished by an award of punitive damages in
an amount to be determined at trial.
Count II
Atempted Extrajudicial Killing Causing Injuries
(PlaintifJohn Doe 2)
1 59. Plaintiff John Doe 2 realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 140 as iffully set forth herein.
1 60. The attempted extrajudicial killing of Plaintiff John Doe 2 constitutes an attempt
to commit an extajudicial killing a defned by the Torture Victim Protection Act, Pub. L. No.
1 02-256, 1 06 Stat. 73 (1 992) (codified at 28 U. S. C. 1 350 Note). Additionally, the attempted
extrajudicial killing constitutes a "tort . . . commited in violation of the law of nations or a treaty
of the United States" uder the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1 350, in that it is in violation
of customary interational law prohibiting extrajudicial killings as refected, expressed, defined
domestic judicial decisions, and other authorities.
1 61 . The attempted extrajudicial killing of John Doe 2 was not authorized by a
judgment pronouced by a regularly constituted court affording all judicial guaranties which are
recognized a indispensable by civilized peoples.
1 62. Defendant Zedillo exercised command responsibility over, ordered, conspired
instrumentalities andlor agencies of the Mexican Goverent who carried out the Acteal
Massacre, including the attempted extrajudicial killing of John Doe 2.
38
1 63. As a result of the attempted extrajudicial killing, Plaintif John Doe 2 sustained
pain and sufering and bodily injuries.
1 64. Defendant Zedillo' s acts or omissions described above, and the acts committed by
the Mexican Goverment who carried out the Acteal Massacre, caused the attempted
extrajudicial killing of John Doe 2 and caused him to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
suffering.
1 66. As a result of the attempts to kill him extrajudicially, Plaintiff John Doe 2 is
1 67. Defendant Zedillo's acts or omissions were deliberate, willful, intentional,
a amount to be determined at trial.
Count IV
Atempted Extrajudicial Killing Causing Injuries
(PlaintifJohn Doe 3)
168. Plaintiff John Doe 3 realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 1 40 as if flly set forth herein.
1 69. The attempted extrajudicial killing of Plaintiff John Doe 3 constitutes an attempt
to commit an extrajudicial killing a defined by the Torture Victim Protection Act, Pub. 1. No.
1 02-256, 1 06 Stat. 73 (1 992) (codified at 28 U. S. C. 1 350 Note). Additionally, the attempted
39
extrajudicial killing constitutes a "tort . . . committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty
of the United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1 350, in that it is in violation
of customary interational law prohibiting extrajudicial killings as reflected, expressed, defined
domestic judicial decisions, and other authorities.
1 70. The attempted extrajudicial killing of John Doe 3 was not authorized by a
judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all judicial guaranties which are
1 71 . Defendant Zedillo exercised command responsibility over, ordered, conspired
Massacre, including the attempted extrajudicial killing of John Doe 3.
1 72. As a result of the attempted extajudicial killing, Plaintiff John Doe 3 sustained
pain and suffering and bodily injuries.
the Mexican Goverent who carried out the Acteal Massacre, caused the attempted
extrajudicial killing of John Doe 3 and caused him to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
suffering.
40
the Mexican Goverment, were committed under actual or apparent authority or color of law of
1 75. As a result of the attempts to kill him extrajudicially, Plaintiff John Doe 3 IS
Count V
Attempted Extrajudicial Kiling
(Plaintif Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,
John Doe 1, John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6)
1 77. Plaintiffs Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe I, John Doe 4, John Doe
5, and John Doe 6 reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs I
through 140 as if flly set forth herein.
1 78. The attempted extrajudicial killings of Plaintiffs Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 3, Jane
Doe 4, John Doe 1 , John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6 constitute attempts to commit
extrajudicial killings as defined by the Torture Victim Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 102-256, 1 06
Stat. 73 (1 992) (codifed at 28 U.S.c. 1 350 Note). Additionally, the attempted extrajudicial
killings constitute "tort[ s 1 . . . committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the
United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1 350, in that they are in violation of
customary interational law prohibiting extrajudicial killings as reflected, expressed, defned and
codified in multilateral treaties and other interational instruments, interational and domestic
judicial decisions, and other authorities.
1 79. The attempted extrajudicial killings of Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John
Doe I, John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6 were not authorized by a judgment pronounced
41
by a regularly constituted court afording all judicial guaranties which are recognized as
indispensable by civilized peoples.
instrumentalities andor agencies of the Mexican Goverent who carried out the Acteal
Massacre, including the attempted extajudicial killings of Plaintifs Jane Doe 1 , Jane Doe 3,
Jane Doe 4, John Doe I, John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6.
1 81 . Defendant Zedillo' s acts or omissions described above, ad the acts committed by
the Mexican Goverent who carried out the Acteal Massacre, caused the attempted
extrajudicial killings of Plaintiffs Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe 1 , John Doe 4,
John Doe 5, and John Doe 6 and caused them to suffer severe mental pain and sufering.
1 83. As a result of the attempts to kill them extrajudicially, Plaintiffs Jae Doe I, Jane
Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe I, John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6 are entitled to damages
in an amount to be determined at trial.
1 84. Defendant Zedillo's acts or omiSSIOns were deliberate, willful, intentional,
42
Count V
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(Al Plaintif s and Decedents)
1 85. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth In
paragraphs I through 1 40 as if flly set forth herein.
1 86. The acts described herein constitute "tort[ s 1 . . . committed in violation of the law
of nations or a treaty of the United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. l 350, in
that they are in violation of customary interational law prohibiting cruel inhuman or degrading
punishment or treatment as reflected, expressed, defined ad codified in multilateral treaties and
other interational instruments, interational and domestic judicial decisions, and other
authorities.
1 87. The acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment described herein
had the intent and effect of humiliating Plaintifs and Decedents and inducing fear and anguish.
As an intended result of these acts, Plaintiffs and Decedents were placed in great fear of their
lives and suffered psychological abuse and agony.
1 88. The cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment of Plaintifs and
Decedents did not aise from, and was not inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexican Goverent who caried out the Acteal
Massacre, including inflicting cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment upon
Plaintiffs and Decedents.
43
the Mexican Goverent who carried out the Acteal Massacre, including inflicting cruel,
inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment upon Plaintiffs and Decedents, caused them to
suffer severe mental pain and suffering, including prolonged mental harm.
1 91 . Defendant Zedillo's acts or omissions described above, and the acts committed by
1 92. As a result of the cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment described
above, Plaintiffs, in both their individual capacities and their capacities as next-of-kin of the
Decedents, are entitled to damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
an amount to be determined at tial.
Count VII
Use ofTerror and Violence to Violate Freedom ofAssociation
(All Plaintifs and Decedents)
1 94. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth II
paragraphs 1 through 140 as if flly set forth herein.
1 95. The acts described herein constitute "tort[s] . . . committed in violation of the law
of nations or a treaty of the United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.c. 1 350, in
that they are violate customary interational law prohibiting terror and violence to violate
freedom of association as reflected, expressed, defned and codified in multilateral teaties and
44
other interational instruments, interational and domestic judicial decisions and other
authorities, including inter alia the 1 949 Geneva Conventions, Convention Against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, United Nations Chater,
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Interational Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
1 96. The acts of terror and violence to violate freedom of association described herein
were orchestrated and designed by Defendant Zedillo and/or various members and/or agents of
one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexican Goverent to
physically terrorize, brutalize, kill, torture, and suppress by any means necessary the political
support for the EZLN.
1 97. The acts of terror and violence to violate freedom of association described herein
were directed against Plaintiffs and Decedents and induced fear and anguish intended to suppress
their right to freedom of association.
1 98. The teror and violence to violate Plaintiffs' and Decedents' freedom of
association did not arise from, and was not inherent in or incidental to, lawl sanctions.
Massacre, including inflicting terror and violence to violate feedom of association upon
Plaintiffs and Decedents.
200. Defendant Zedillo' s acts or omissions described above, and the acts committed by
45
20 I . As a result of the terror and violence to violate feedom of association described
above, Plaintiffs, in both their individual capacities and their capacities a next-of-kin of the
Decedents, are entitled to damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
202. Defendant Zedillo's acts or omissions were deliberate, willfl, intentional,
Count VI
Use ofTerror and Violence to Volate Freedom ofThought,
Political Opinion, and Freedom to Exercise the Political Franchise
(All Plaintifs and Decedents)
203. Plaintiffs reallege ad incorporate by reference the allegations set forth In
paragraphs I through 1 40 as iffully set forth herein.
204. The acts described herein constitute "tort[s] . . . committed in violation of the law
of nations or a treaty of the United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U .S.C. 1350, in
that they are in violation of customary interational law prohibiting terror and violence to violate
freedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political franchise as reflected,
expressed, defined, and codified in multilateral treaties and other interational instruments,
interational and domestic judicial decisions and other authorities, including inter alia the 1 949
Geneva Conventions, Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment, United Nations Charter, Universal Declaration of Huma Rights, ad
the Interational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
205. The acts ofterror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion and
feedom to exercise the political franchise described herein were orchestrated and designed by
46
Defendant Zedillo and/or varIOus members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions,
instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexican Goverment to physically terrorze, brutalize,
kill, torture, and suppress by any means necessary the political support for the EZLN.
206. The acts of terror and violence to violate freedom of thought, political opinion and
freedom to exercise the political franchise described herein were directed against Plaintiffs and
Decedents and induced fear and anguish intended to suppress their right to freedom of thought,
political opinion and feedom to exercise the political franchise.
207. The terror and violence to violate Plaintiffs' and Decedents' freedom of thought,
political opinion and feedom to exercise the political franchise did not arise from, and was not
inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexica Goverment who carried out the Acteal
Massacre, including inficting upon Plaintiffs and Decedents terror and violence to violate their
feedom of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political franchise.
209. Defendant Zedillo's acts or omissions described above, and the acts committed by
21 0. As a result of the terror and violence to violate feedom of thought, political
opinion and feedom to exercise the political franchise described above, Plaintiffs, in both their
47
individual capacities and their capacities as next-of-kin ofthe Decedents, are entitled to damages
in an amount to be determined at trial.
21 1 . Defendant Zedillo' s acts or omiSSIOns were deliberate, willfl, intentional,
Count IX
Crimes Against Humanit
(All Plaintif s and Decedents)
21 2. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth II
paragraphs 1 through 140 as if flly set forth herein.
21 3. The extrajudicial killings of Decedents Richard Roe 1 , Mary Roe 1 and Mary Roe
2; the attempted extrajudicial killings causing injuries of Jane Doe 2, John Doe 2, and John Doe
3; the attempted extrajudicial killings of Jane Doe 1 , Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe 1 , John
Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6; the acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or
treatment upon all Plaintiffs and Decedents; the acts of terror and violence to violate freedom of
association upon all Plaintifs and Decedents; and acts of terror and violence to violate feedom
of thought, political opinion and feedom to exercise the political franchise upon all Plaintiffs
and Decedents, as described herein constitute "tort[ s 1 . . . committed in violation of the law of
nations or a treaty of the United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1 350, in
that they violate customary interational law prohibiting crimes against humanity as reflected,
expressed, defined, and codified in multilateral treaties and other interational instruments,
interational and domestic judicial decisions and other authorities.
21 4. The acts described herein were orchestrated and designed by Defendant Zedillo
and/or various members and/or agents of one or more subdivisions, instrumentalities andlor
48
agencies of the Mexican Goverent to physically terrorize, brutalize, kill, torture and suppress
by any means necessary the political support for the EZLN.
21 5. These acts did not arise from, and were not inherent in or incidental to, lawful
sactions.
Massacre, including committing crimes against humanity upon PlaintifIs and Decedents.
21 8. As a result of the crimes against humanity described above, Plaintiffs, in both
their individual capacities and their capacities as next-of-kin of the Decedents, are entitled to
damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
21 9. Defendant Zedillo' s acts or omissions were deliberate, willful, intentional,
an amount to be determined at trial .
Count X
War Crimes
220. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth in
paragraphs I through 140 as if fully set forth herein.
49
221 . The extrajudicial killings of Decedents Richard Roe I, Mary Roe I and Mary Roe
2; the attempted extrajudicial killings causing injuries of Jane Doe 2, John Doe 2, and John Doe
3; the attempted extrajudicial killings of Jane Doe I, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe I, John
Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6; the acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or
treatment upon all Plaintiffs and Decedents; the acts of terror and violence to violate feedom of
association upon all Plaintiffs and Decedents; and acts of terror and violence to violate freedom
of thought, political opinion and freedom to exercise the political franchise upon all Plaintifs
and Decedents, as described herein constitute "tort[ s 1 . . . committed in violation of the law of
nations or a treaty of the United States" under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.c. 1 350, in
that they are in violation of customary interational law prohibiting war crimes as refected,
expressed, defined and codified in multilateral treaties and other interational instruments,
interational and domestic judicial decisions, and other authorities.
instrumentalities and/or agencies of the Mexican Goverent who planned to commit war
crimes, including the Acteal Massacre.
223. Defendant Zedillo's acts or omissions described above, and the acts committed by
50
224. The acts were committed during and in connection with the armed conflict
between the Mexican Goverent and the EZLN in Chiapas, which was an armed conflict not of
an interational character.
225. Under Mexican and interational law, this armed conflict bound Defendant
Zedillo to follow at least some of the obligations of the Four Geneva Conventions of 1 949,
including inter alia Common Article 3 thereof and the customary norms of interational law
regarding interal armed conflicts.
226. As a result of the war crimes described above, Plaintiffs, in both their individual
capacities and their capacities as next-of-kin of the Decedents, are entitled to damages in an
amount to be determined at trial.
227. Defendant Zedillo's acts or omISSIOns were deliberate, willfl, intentional,
Count X
Claimfor Declarator Relief
Pursuant to the Federal Declarator Judgment Act, 28 U.S. c. 2201
228. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations set forth m
paragraphs 1 through 1 40 as iffully set forth herein.
229. This Court is authorized to declare the rights and other legal relations of any
interested party seeking such a declaration, whether or not frther relief is or could be sought.
230. A real and justiciable controversy exists between the parties with respect to the
acts and omissions by Defendant Zedillo as set forth hereinabove. Plaintiffs are entitled to a
declaration of the rights and liabilities of the parties to this action pursuant to the Federal
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U. S. C. 2201 .
5 1
231. Plaintiffs are uncertain as to all of their rights and obligations and require a
detennination by the Court of their respective present and future rights and obligations based
upon Zedillo' s actions and omissions, as set forth hereinabove.
232. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request judgment declaring the rights and interests of
Plaintiffs and Zedillo, based on the acts and omissions by Defendant Zedillo as set forth herein.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, John Doe I,
John Doe 2, John Doe 3, John Doe 4, John Doe 5, and John Doe 6, in both their individual
capacities and their respective capacities as representatives of Decedents Richard Roe 1, Mary
Roe I, and Mary Roe 2, pray for judgment against Defendant, Eresto Zedillo Ponce de Leon as
follows:
1. For compensatory damages according to proof;
2. For punitive and exemplary damages according to proof;
3. For pre-judgment interest as allowed by law;
4. For attoreys' fees and costs of suit, according to proof;
5. For a declaration of the rights, interests, liabilities and obligations of Plaintifs,
Decedents, and Defendant Zedillo, based on the acts and omissions by Defendant Zedillo as set
forth hereinabove; and
6. For any such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
52
DEMAD FOR JRY TRAL
Plaintiffs hereby demand trial by jury of all issues so triable as of right.
Dated this 1 6th day of September, 20 II.
By:
MATTHEW DALLAS GORDON LLC
836 Farmington Ave., Suite 221A
West Hartford, Connecticut 061 1 9
(860) 523-0471 Tel.
(860) 523-0472 Fax

Matthew D. Gordon (Bar No. ct02355)
mattgordon@mdgordonlaw.com
- and -
RAFFERTY KOBERT TENENHOLTZ
BOUNDS & HESS, P.A.
Roger S. Kobert (Not admitted in D.Conn.)
rkobert@raffertylawers.com
Marc C. Pugliese (Not admitted in D.Conn.)
mpugliese@rafertylawers.com
1401 Brickell Avenue, Suite 825
Miami, Florida 33 1 3 1 -3502
(305) 373-0330 Tel.
(305) 373-2735 Fax
Counsel for Plaintif
53

Ernesto Zedillo Complaint

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ernesto Zedillo Complaint

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Case 3:11-cv-01433-AWT Document 1 Filed 09/16/11 Page 1 of 28

Вам также может понравиться