criminal case shows, a call for a taxi by the school doorman –on express orders from the school’s assistant principal- was the only help that the alleged victim’s mother received in getting her daughter to a hospital. They contend that on that same day, the alleged victim died at the “Clínica Kennedy” in Guayaquil, from intoxication caused by voluntary ingestion of white phosphorous. 13. The petitioners argue that the parents of Paola del Rosario have exhausted all remedies of the domestic legal system, in the criminal, civil and administrative-law jurisdictions and that none of these remedies has been effective in redressing the violations alleged. The petitioners specifically claim that: “The criminal case has been suspended for over two years; the resolution of the administrative-law case was a complete whitewash of the sexual aggression committed against Paola; the civil venue is not the proper one to obtain full redress for the pain and suffering caused to Petita and her family, and will never be effective so long as he [the assistant principal] remains a fugitive from justice.”6 The petitioners argue that by the irregularities and the unwarranted delays, particularly in the criminal case and the administrative law case, the Ecuadorian State has been complicit in allowing the alleged violations to go unpunished and in the cover-up of the sexual violence committed against the alleged victim, and has thus frustrated the family’s legitimate expectation of justice. 14. The petitioners contend that on December 16, 2002, the alleged victim’s father, Máximo Guzmán, brought a criminal complaint against the high school’s assistant principal, which he lodged with the Office of the Public Prosecutor of Guayas and Galápagos. The complaint was referred to the Sex Crimes Unit of the Guayas District Attorney’s Office. On June 12, 2003, when the preliminary investigations were completed, the prosecutor decided to charge the assistant principal with the crime of sexual harassment. On July 15, 2003, the Twentieth Criminal Judge of Guayas assumed jurisdiction over the case and on August 22, 2003, the Prosecutor petitioned the court seeking an order of preventive detention against the accused. On September 10, 2003, the judge denied the petition seeking preventive detention, arguing that the attached documentation did not alter the accused’ legal status. The petitioners observe that the prosecutor appealed the decision. On December 18, 2003, the Third Chamber of the Superior Court overturned the decision of 6 Original petition received at the IACHR at October 2, 2006, paragraph 87. 5