16 54(6) On December 18, 1997 the Second Lower Court of Criminal Matters, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes of Escuintla issued the order for trial to commence and admitted the indictment made by the Office of the Public Prosecutor against Mr. Fermín Ramírez for the crime of aggravated rape.16 54(7) On March 5 and 6 of 1998 the oral and public hearing against Mr. Fermín Ramírez took place before the Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Trial Court.17 54(8) On the morning of March 5, 1998, during the first part of the oral and public hearing, the Trial Court admitted the legal medical report of May 29, 1997 on the necropsy practiced on the dead minor by the Department’s Forensic Examiner, Luis Erick Douglas de León Barrera, who ratified the content of said report by testifying in the mentioned debate. To the questions of the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the Court, Mr. de León Barrera replied that: The lungs [of the dead minor] were expanded in size due to the inhalation performed, they were logically full of oxygen and this increases the size of the lungs, the set of lungs and trachea is probably due to the inhalation at some time by the victim and that immediately after the inhalation or during the inhalation the trachea and the large vessels were obstructed[. D]ue to the injuries described, the violence used when treating the minor was definitely excessive. […] From the characteristics of the body, the injuries to the neck and the injuries found on the trachea it could have been a sexual necroph[ilia]; I do think that asphyxia was the cause of death; it could have been that the person raped the girl first and then killed her, so she wouldn’t say anything […].18 54(9) On the afternoon of March 5, 1998, upon the reopening of the oral hearing and after having heard the statements of Mr. Fermín Ramírez and five expert witnesses, including the one given by Doctor de León Barrera (supra para. 54(8)), the Court warned the parties of the possibility of a modification in the legal classification of the crime, without specifying the new classification, in the following terms: According [to] that established in Article three hundred and seventy four and three hundred and eighty eight of the code of criminal procedures, the Court warns the parties that at the right time a legal classification different to the one contemplated in the indictment and the order for trial to commence may be given.19 54(10) Article 333 of the Code of Criminal Procedures states: Alternative accusation. The Office of the Public Prosecutor, in the event that in the debate all or any of the facts on which the main legal classification are based are not 16 Cfr. Order for trial to commence of December 18, 1997 issued by the Second Lower Court of Criminal Matters, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 5, folio 55). 17 Cfr. Record of the oral trial moved forward to March 5 and 6, 1998 by the Criminal, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes Trial Court (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 6, folio 57). 18 Cfr. Record of the oral trial moved forward to March 5 and 6, 1998 by the Criminal, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes Trial Court (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 6, folios 62 and 63). 19 Cfr. Record of the oral trial moved forward to March 5 and 6, 1998 by the Criminal, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes Trial Court (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 6, folio 68).