Sosa.”188 He said that he had told him that the check was genuine because he had obtained the copy from a teller and that the Director of the DGIC had placed it in a safe.189 113. On August 20, 2001, the court found that the copy of the check, “according to the investigation, never existed.”190 It therefore resolved to start formalities to “investigate the commission of the crime of falsification of financial instruments.”191 114. That same day, it issued a dismissal resolution on behalf of Miguel Facussé and Irene Castro Reyes,192 which was requested by both parties on August 8, 2001, claiming that it had been established that “they have no direct or indirect relation to the alleged facts.”193 The court ruled that Lucas García Alfaro’s statement confessing his participation in the murder of Carlos Escaleras Mejía “lacks the factual and legal basis necessary to give it credibility” and added that the check that was presented did not exist.194 115. That same day, the prosecution service lodged an appeal against the dismissal, which was admitted by the First-Instance Court on August 27 of that year and sent to the Court of Appeal in La Ceiba. 195 116. On November 14, 2001, the Court of Appeal in La Ceiba annulled the dismissal of Miguel Facussé and Irene de Jesús Castro from the proceedings on the grounds that it was indispensable for them to “report voluntarily to the trial judge for him to receive their statements.”196 On February 13, 2002, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice received an amparo remedy presented by Miguel Facussé and Irene de Jesús Castro, seeking the reversal of the appeal court’s decision.197 117. On October 16, 2002, the court convicted Lucas García Alfaro and sentenced him to seventeen years in prison for the crime of murdering Carlos Escaleras. 198 118. On November 12, 2002, Arnulfo Romero Andrade, an employee of Jesús Martínez and the uncle of Congressman Salomón Martínez, stated that some days after the death of Carlos Escaleras, he accompanied his employer to deliver some 250,000 lempiras to Orlando Martínez. He said that Jesús Martínez 188 Annex 81. Statement of Santos Figueroa Hernández, dated August 16, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, p. 499, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 189 Annex 81. Statement of Santos Figueroa Hernández, dated August 16, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, p. 499, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 190 14, 2002. 191 14, 2002. Annex 82. Court document, dated August 20, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 504, annexed to the initial petition of January Annex 82. Court document, dated August 20, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 504, annexed to the initial petition of January 192 Annex 82. Court document, dated August 20, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 505-507, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 193 Annex 83. Dismissal request document, dated August 8, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 492-495, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 194 Annex 84. Court document, dated August 20, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 505-507, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 195 2002. Annex 85. Court document, dated August 27, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, p. 513, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 196 Annex 86. Resolution of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, dated August 8, 2003, Annex 1 to the petitioners’ communication of April 24, 2004. 197 Annex 86. Resolution of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, dated August 8, 2003, Annex 1 to the petitioners’ communication of April 24, 2004. 198 Annex 87. Judgment of the First-Instance Court, dated November 12, 2002, case file of trial brought against the masterminds behind the crime, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 23