hypovolemic shock from a single bullet wound with an asymmetric contusion halo on the right of the right pectoral region, 3rd right intercostal space with parasternal line, exit orifice in the 7th left intercostal space with posterior axillar line;100 (b) David Díaz Loreto had three gunshot wounds that penetrated his thorax, two of them caused severe cardiac injury with passive hemothorax leading to death; the cause of death was massive hemopneumothorax due to gunshot wound;101 (c) according to the forensic appraisals, the shots were fired from a “distance”102 and not point blank as the representatives have argued, and (d) a .380 caliber pistol, FEG Mark II, was gathered at the scene of the incident, near a bloodstain, with two non-percussed bullets, three shells of .380 bullets, and one silver shotgun, Renegade .12 caliber with a percussed shotgun shell and another non-percussed cartridge in the pockets of David Díaz Loreto.103 ii. Analysis of the evidence related to the alleged confrontations 80. The Court notes that, as already indicated, it is difficult to determine whether or not a confrontation took place with the police officers. Nevertheless, the Court also notes that there are a series of contradictions and inconsistencies in the version of the facts concerning the existence of a confrontation. First, there is the testimony of several family members and neighbors that contradicts this version (supra para. 39). Second, according to the statements of the witnesses who support the hypothesis of the confrontation, during the supposed first exchange of fire, the three alleged victims had fired at the police officers (supra para. 41). However, only one .38 caliber revolver with 5 used shells in the barrel was found, and some shells from 9 mm. weapons that were used by the police. Apart from these findings that are precisely described in the inspection reports, no shell was found that corresponded to the .380 caliber pistol, which was found at the scene of the second exchange of fire during which Octavio Díaz and David Díaz Loreto lost their life (supra para. 42). If, these three individuals had fired against the police detail, as indicated by the State and the different statements that support this version of the facts, shells should have been found that corresponded to the latter weapon (in weapons of that type, the shells are expelled once a shot has been fired). 81. Third, it is unclear how long the police patrol car took to reach the Corinsa Social Security facility so that Robert Díaz Loreto could receive attention, because it has been indicated that Robert Díaz Loreto’s body was left off at the facility at 7.30 p.m. and he had been shot between 6 and 6.30 p.m. at a location that was, at most, a 15-minute drive from the medical center (supra para. 75). All the statements, including those supporting the hypothesis of the confrontation, are unanimous in indicating that Robert Díaz Loreto was placed in the police patrol vehicle, which – according to the police officers – drove directly to the Corinsa Social Security facility (supra para. 77). Based on this timeline, Mr. Díaz Loreto should have arrived between 6.15 and 6.45 p.m. at the latest, especially considering that he was being transported in a police patrol car that was able to drive much faster than a private vehicle. None of Venezuela’s domestic authorities examined these discrepancies in the times and, during the processing of the instant case, neither did the State offer any kind of explanation concerning that delay or those temporal inconsistencies. Furthermore, it should be recalled that some statements by family members and neighbors indicate that they had Cf. Statement by expert Mendoza Goicochea Solangela, cited in the judgment of the Criminal Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of Aragua state of September 4, 2004 (evidence file, folio 6564). 100 Cf. Statement by the expert Mendoza Goicochea Solangela, cited in the judgment of the Criminal Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of Aragua state of September 4, 2004 (evidence file, folio 6564). 101 Cf. Statement by expert witness Teraza Sergio Rodolfo, cited in the judgment of the Criminal Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of Aragua state of September 4, 2004 (evidence file, folio 6549). 102 Cf. Statement by expert Oviedo Seijas Joel Jose, cited in the judgment of the Criminal Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of Aragua state of September 4, 2004 (evidence file, folio 6548). 103 -26-