Some of the prosecution evidence against the so-called "Colombia Three" was "unreal, fantasy-like and contradictory", according to a dissenting member of the appeal tribunal.
Judge Jorgé Enrique Torres was one of three judges who heard an appeal lodged in the case of three Irishmen, James Monaghan (59), Martin McCauley (42) and Niall Connolly (39), after they had been found not guilty last April on a charge of training Farc guerrillas.
An appeal was lodged at the time by the Colombian attorney general. A majority appeal ruling last December overturned the original verdict and imposed sentences of 17 years and heavy fines. The men could not be traced and are now being sought by Interpol.
In his dissenting opinion Judge Torres cited Colombian criminal law to the effect that it was not possible to condemn the accused men unless there was certainty - he underlined the word "certainty" - of the punishable conduct and responsibility of the accused. If there was no certainty they should be found not guilty.
While accepting the men were guilty of using false passports, he lacked certainty of their guilt on the charge of training the Farc. The only decision he could arrive at was to concur with the original verdict of not guilty.
He said he was "assailed by numberless doubts" with regard to the technical evidence from the prosecution which "did not indicate anything". He failed to see the need for having a "specialised adviser" from the US embassy to perform "illegal" tests on the men which found explosive residues on them.
These tests could just as easily have been carried out by the Colombian security agency, DAS, which found no traces of explosive residue.