according to the domestic criminal case file, the alleged victim was rescued thanks to the actions of the police who responded to a call made to the Chacao Police Station; and that the Office of the Public Prosecutor has launched the corresponding criminal proceeding to “punish the commission of the crimes” committed to the detriment of Linda Loaiza López. 30. As far as the judicial processes, the State submitted a detailed account of the actions taken by the 33rd Prosecutor of the Office of the Public Prosecutor of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas; the Technical Division of the Judicial Police; the General Forensic Medicine Division; the oversight courts and the court that participated in the process; and the requests filed and remedies sought by the parties during the various stages of the process. Along with those actions, the State indicated that the criminal investigation was quickly ordered launched by the 33rd Office of the Prosecutor on July 19, 2001, along with the steps necessary to resolve the facts. That office also ordered “the securing of all passive and active objects related to the perpetration of the crime.” In its brief of comments on the merits, the State also made reference to certain evidence collection, stating that Luminol tests and tests comparing the blood of Linda Loaiza López with the blood and semen of the person she indicated as her attacker were ordered and carried out. Also, during the public hearing on the case, the State indicated that it had performed a Luminol test but did not give any details as far as the date and how it was done. 31. The State also indicated that the purpose of the “rule prohibiting visits” put in place while Linda Loaiza López was admitted at the University Clinic Hospital was to “preserve her physical safety and allow the Office of the Prosecutor to carry out a better investigation;” and that on July 25, 2001, the Office of the Public Prosecutor sent an official letter to the hospital authorizing Linda’s father, mother, and aunt to visit her in her room based on their family ties. 32. The State also indicated that on August 22, 2001, the Prosecutor requested that Luis Antonio Carrera Almoina be placed in preventative detention in connection with the alleged crimes of hiding psychotropic or narcotic substances, rape, and causing general personal injury. It indicated that although that measure was not initially agreed upon by the Eighteenth First Instance Oversight Tribunal, the Court “was not unaware of the injuries caused” to the detriment of Linda Loaiza López, and for its part, on the following September 10, it ordered he be placed under house arrest with a permanent police guard. The State therefore argued that this was a well-founded court decision based on options available under the domestic legal system and that it did not represent a violation of the rights of the alleged victim. It also stated that the measure was later annulled by the Eighteenth Oversight Court Tribunal itself, but that on November 8, 2001, Luis Antonio Carrera Almoina, his father and two other individuals were ordered placed in preventative detention. The State added that although the attacker escaped from his house arrest on November 6, 2001, his disappearance was investigated immediately and the accused was detained within a matter of hours. 33. The State indicated that the investigation phase lasted a total of three months and 17 days and can therefore not be considered a violation of the reasonable period of time requirement when taking into account the complexity of the facts investigated and the media controversy surrounding the case. As far as the trial stage, the State detailed the delays ordered by the Trial Court and the process of gathering a pool of candidates and then selecting the lay magistrates for the mixed tribunal, a process which in the end failed. Thus the State indicated that on August 22, 2002, the Thirtieth First Instance Trial Tribunal of the Caracas Metropolitan Area was established as a single-judge trial tribunal. It indicated that once the oral argument stage concluded, the 20th Trial Court found the defendant not guilty on November 5, 2004. 34. In this regard, the State indicated that as with all the decisions in the judicial process, the judgment was well-founded and all the available evidence was analyzed, including the testimony of the alleged victim and the defendant. The State highlighted that the Tribunal did find that crimes had been committed against Linda Loaiza López and recognized their seriousness, but that it had not been proven that the defendant was the perpetrator “of the injuries and the rape.” Specifically with regard to the crime of torture, the State pointed to the finding in the ruling to acquit to the effect that pursuant to the International Criminal Court Statute (hereinafter “the Rome Statute”), torture was a systematic and generalized crime committed against a civilian population, for which reason it could not be applied in this case.