and he indicated that he asked for medical examiners to be summoned; however, he insisted that the statements were taken by the investigators assigned to the case and that he had not been present.68 32. Blas Valencia, Eladio Cruz Añez, Patricia Gallardo, and Francis Primentela Merino waived their right to submit evidence in their defense.69 Rosario Viscarra Garnica, a lawyer from the Chamber of Deputies Human Rights Commission, who was presented as a defense witness for another accused woman, declared that she went to the PTJ facilities and saw that Blas Valencia had a bruise over the left cheekbone.70 She said that she had gone in response to complaints that the detainees could not use the bathroom facilities, were not being given food or medication, and were unable to receive legal assistance.71 She also remarked that the cells were very cramped and that there were a lot of people in them, with only one bed; she was unable to recall if that was on the men's side or the women's side. She also found that the detainees were being held incommunicado and that their attorneys could not enter the cells.72 33. One of the petitioners in this case, Victoria Gutiérrez de Lulleman, who was not prosecuted for the Prosegur robbery but testified as a witness for the defense, referred to the raid on her house on December 18, 2001, by the police, including General Osinaga. She said that the raid took place at around 2:00 a.m., her home and property were violated, and the occupants inhumanly treated, insulted, and threatened; her four-year-old grandson had a gun pointed at him in the pouring rain, her son was brutally beaten and kicked, and all were arrested. They were then taken to an empty cell where they were very badly treated, unable to wash, not allowed to go to the bathroom, and had nothing to eat. There were 12 women detained; they were taken out into the corridor and forced to strip naked and spread their legs. One of them was in a very bad way but received no care. They did not have access to a lawyer and there was no lawyer present when she gave her statement. Subsequently they were presented to the press and had falsehoods told about them, which caused them a civil death. She had not known any of those involved prior to the arrest, yet she was detained for two months.73 34. In addition to witness testimonies, a multitude of documentary and material evidence was presented for both the prosecution and the defense.74 The inclusion of each exhibit was discussed by the parties, with both the prosecution and the accused, whether directly or through their lawyers, afforded the opportunity to make submissions on the admissibility of each. As a result of that procedure, the court ordered a number of items of evidence to be excluded, including: (a) the records of arms inspection and their respective photographs, which were barred for having being done after the statements of the defendants were taken, in contravention of Article 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and because they were collected in violation of Articles 180 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and 21 of the Constitution, as they were procured at the domicile of one of the accused between 3:00 a.m and 5:00 a.m.;75 and (b) documents signed by Oswaldo Lulleman, Raul Lulleman, Leonel Delgadillo, and Patricia Gallardo admitting compromising acts, which were excluded because they were obtained with promises and inducement of errors on the part of representatives of the Public Prosecution Service.76 Finally, a visual inspection was performed, followed by a reconstruction of the scene, with the voluntary participation of all defendants.77 35. In its ruling, the Trial Court found Blas Valencia Campos, Patricia Catalina Gallardo Ardúz, Carlos Eladio Cruz Añez, Elasio Peña Córdova, Carlos Enrique Castro Ramírez, Alfredo Bazán y Rosas, and Victor Manuel Boggiano Bruzzon guilty of the crimes of murder, aggravated robbery, criminal association, and aggravated injury, and sentenced each to 30 years’ imprisonment. Freddy Cáceres Castro and Norma Lupe Alarcón Castillo de Valencia were found guilty of the crimes of aggravated robbery and criminal association and of complicity in the crimes of murder and aggravated injury, as were Mercedes Valencia Chuquimia, Raúl Oswaldo Lulleman Gutiérrez, and Oswaldo Lulleman Antezana; the former were sentenced to 22 years’ imprisonment, and the Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of March 11, 2003, p. 1257. Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearings of April 7, 8, and 10, 2003, pp. 1320, 1336-1337, 1345. 70 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of April 7, 2003, p. 1322. 71 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of April 7, 2003, pp. 1322-1323. 72 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of April 7, 2003, pp. 1322-1323. 73 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of April 8, 2003, pp. 1332-1334. 74 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearings of April 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 28 and 30 and May 5, 2003, pp. 1356-1433. 75 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of April 22, 2003, pp. 1378-1389. 76 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of April 23, 2003, pp. 1392-1398. 77 Annex 01, Prosegur case file, Hearing of May 7, 2003, pp. 1434-1511. 68 69 10