The Evandro Case

Six-year-old Evandro Ramos Caetano disappeared in Guaratuba, Paraná, on April 6, 1992. His death triggered an enormous investigation that became entangled with accusations of ritual killing, political rivalry and confessions later shown to have been obtained through abuse. Decades later, the case is as important for what it reveals about investigative misconduct as for the unanswered question of who killed Evandro.

A concise timeline

1. April 6, 1992
   Evandro disappears

   The six-year-old vanishes in Guaratuba, Paraná.

2. April 1992
   A body is recovered

   The investigation becomes a major state and national case.

3. 1990s–2000s
   Trials and convictions

   Several defendants are prosecuted under the ritual-killing theory.

4. 2023
   Convictions are annulled

   The Paraná court reverses key outcomes.

5. September 2025
   STJ maintains acquittals

   The Superior Court of Justice rejects the tortured-confession evidence and highlights investigative abuse.

The disappearance and discovery

Evandro vanished on his way through central Guaratuba. Days later, a child’s body was found and identified as his through multiple forms of evidence. The state was already dealing with other missing-child cases, which intensified fear and pressure for an arrest.

The “ritual” theory takes over

Investigators accused a group of local people, including members of a politically connected family, of participating in a ritual killing. That theory became the dominant public narrative for years, even though the physical evidence and the reliability of the confessions were heavily contested.

Confessions under coercion

Audio evidence that became widely known decades later supported defense claims that some confessions were extracted through torture. The legal significance was profound: evidence obtained through torture cannot be treated as a valid foundation for conviction.

Convictions undone

In 2023, the Paraná court annulled convictions in the case. In September 2025, Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice maintained the acquittal of four defendants and explicitly warned against abuses in criminal investigations, recognizing the invalidity of evidence obtained through torture.

What remains unresolved

The judicial reversal does not answer the central question of who killed Evandro. It does, however, change how the archive should describe the case: the former defendants cannot responsibly be presented as proven perpetrators, and the homicide remains without a judicially established author.