The article examines the vice of distortion of evidence in the context of Chilean criminal justice. To this end, after denoting its fundamental characteristics and features, as well as its comparative evolution in other Civil law jurisdictions, it is proposed to identify it as a defect of the duty to give reasons that affects the external justification of the factual decision and, in particular, the argumentative consistency of the various elements of evidence that serve as its basis. From there, inquiring into how this defect in the duty of giving reasons manifests itself, the errors that cause it and the possible ways of controlling it, the article concludes by proposing a series of criteria and guidelines that, de lege ferenda, could mitigate the scant or null attention paid in Chile to this pathology.