20 accused, despite the order of preventive detention he has been seen in public, and therefore requested the Judge to verify that the orders issued were met by both civilian and military57. 107. On April 26, 1994, the Provincial Commandant of the Esmeraldas National Police informed the Third Criminal Judge of Esmeraldas that Police Officer Guillermo Segundo Cortez Escobedo was in detention pending trial at the Pechicha Provincial Command Post No. 1, Southern Headquarters, on orders from the First Judge of the First National Police District, for the crime of murdering the child José Luis García Ibarra.58 108. On May 30, 1994, the Third Criminal Court of Esmeraldas issued an order setting the matter for trial and confirmed the order of detention pending trial.59 109. Both the accused and the next of kin of the adolescent García Ibarra filed appeals that the Superior Court of Esmeraldas was called upon to hear. The appeal was decided on February 14, 1995. The Esmeraldas Superior Court wrote that after a thorough review of all the circumstances of the case and the procedural documents, it had established that the deed committed constituted a crime for which the accused bore responsibility. The Court wrote that it shared the view of the Public Prosecutor’s Office to the effect that the order should be amended and that the accused should be ordered to stand trial for the crime of qualified murder, based on Article 450, subparagraph 1 of the Criminal Code.60 110. The case went to criminal court on May 10, 1995. At this point in the proceedings, the private plaintiff officially withdrew from the case that she had brought for her son’s death. The Commission does not have any information about the reasons why she withdrew. According to the petitioners, a financial settlement had been reached between the plaintiff and the defendant.61 111. The trial hearing began on September 5, 1995,62 the date on which pronouncement of the verdict was deferred on the grounds that new evidence had to be taken to examine the scene of the events. 112. On October 4, 1995 the process was suspended and it was ordered a recognition of the scene of the events for the third time63. The recognition of the scene of the events was performed again 57 Appendix 12. Record of the judicial proceedings (Supplied by the petitioners on January 10, 2013), p. 140, Vol. II. 58 Appendix 28. Memorandum No. 94-356-CP-14 from the Esmeraldas Provincial Command, No. 14, April 26, 1994. 59 Appendix 29. Decision of the third criminal judge, May 30, 1994 ((Attachment to the petitioner’s brief of June 19, 2009). 60 Appendix 30. February 14, 1995 decision of the Esmeraldas Superior Court. See also: Appendix 31. March 6, 1995 decision of the Esmeraldas Superior Court (Attachment to the petitioner’s brief of June 19, 2009). 61 Appendix 22. Judgment of Dr. Thelmo Palomeque Medina of the Esmeraldas Criminal Court, delivered on November 17, 1995 (Attachment to the petitioners’ brief of April 10, 1996). See also: Appendix XX. Petitioners’ brief of April 10, 1996. 62 Appendix 32. Record of the September 5, 1995 hearing of the Esmeraldas Criminal Court (Attachment to the petitioners’ brief of April 10, 1996). 63 Appendix 12. Record of the judicial proceedings (Supplied by the petitioners on January 10, 2013), p. 48. (Contained in the volume after p. 168).