16. They report that on February 2, 2001 they received a call from the hospital requesting that they pick up the alleged victim, who had been discharged. They came to the hospital and requested a physician to inform them regarding the care and treatment for the alleged victim, but no doctor responded to their call. According to the complaint, when he was discharged from the hospital the alleged victim’s condition was so serious that his family had to pay for a private ambulance to take him home.3 They contend that the hospital’s medical personnel acted irresponsibly in releasing the patient after only six days had passed since his operation, and whose state of health was so serious, considering his age and his diabetic condition. 17. On February 5, 2001, because of the seriousness of alleged victim’s state of health, they called a private doctor who examined him at home, and realized that he was draining pus through some orifices in his chest, and diagnosed him as having high fever and suffering from septic shock and bronchopneumonia,4 and told them they needed to take him to the hospital. The petitioners maintain that, according to the private physician, it was inexplicable that the patient had been discharged in such a serious state of health. They report that on that same day the alleged victim was again admitted to the Sótero del Río Hospital, through the emergency room. 18. They contend that when he arrived at the hospital he was diagnosed with simple pneumonia. That night, they say, the alleged victim was transferred to the intensive care unit but that there were no available artificial respirators. They maintain that, in spite of their requests, the hospital did nothing to transfer him to another hospital where he could use a respirator. 19. On February 7, 2001, in the early hours of the morning, the alleged victim died in the hospital. The petitioners contend that the person who called from the hospital to inform him of the death stated that Mr. Vinicio Poblete Vilches had died of cardiac arrest. Subsequently, in the morgue, they received a death certificate stating the cause of death as septic shock and bilateral bronchopneumonia. In addition, a tape5 on his chest stated that he had died from a pulmonary edema. They maintain that his body was full of bruises, of which he also had some on his forehead. They go on to say that a nurse had informed 3 The petitioners attached a copy of the receipt given to them by the ambulance crew. 4 The petitioners attached a certificate issued by Dr. Sandra Castillo Montúfar, who is a specialist in General Medicine and Surgery. 5 The petitioners attached a copy of the tape that they claim was on the chest of the alleged victim. 5