85 clarified.372 The same day, according to a 2003 report by Amnesty International, his wife was threatened by two unidentified men.373 On February 8, 2003, Mr. González died in the prison where he was interned, just hours after a surgical operation.374 339. On October 13, 2004, the Third Criminal Judge of the Bravos Judicial District sentenced Mr. García to fifty years’ imprisonment, finding him guilty of the Cotton Field murders.375 The judge indicated that the “retraction” made by the accused “was unconvincing” because “it resulted from further thought about the consequences of acknowledging perpetration of a crime, or the recommendations of their legal counsel.” The judge added that “the signs of mistreatment found on their bodies cannot be the reason why they signed their initial statements.” 340. On July 14, 2005, the Fourth Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Chihuahua revoked the ruling in first instance, based on lack of evidence against Mr. García.376 Furthermore, this Chamber indicated that, in order to detain and accuse Mr. García, a prior investigation was used concerning “entirely different facts” that occurred in 1999, which provided “no basis […] for deciding to order his detention.” Lastly, it noted that no arrest warrant had been issued, when it would have been perfectly possible to obtain one. Based on the foregoing, the Chamber indicated that “the detention of [Mr. García and Mr. González] was arbitrary.” With regard to the confessions, the Chamber stated that “it was difficult to believe that, knowing their right [not to incriminate themselves,] both the accused would have given such a detailed account […] of their participation in the facts,” and that they even accepted the 1999 facts, “even though no one questioned them in this regard.” It also alluded to the “contradiction between [the confessions] and the autopsies,” so that “the confessions of the two accused were prepared to coincide with the dates of the disappearances of the women who were said to have been their victims.” 341. It should be emphasized that, in 2003, the CNDH considered that “it was never indicated, and there was no evidence that would, at least, have permitted the presumption that the injuries were self-inflicted; to the contrary, there were allegations that […] they had been tortured”; consequently, the CNDH considered “it had been proved that […] they had been subjected to serious suffering in order to make them confess to a crime.” In addition, the CNDH stated that “the performance of the defense counsel appears to be contrary to that which should be carried out according to the Constitution,” “because, at one point of the confession, he supplemented the answers of those he was defending in order to ensure a stronger 372 La CNDH indicated that “according to the state of Chihuahua authorities, he was killed because he was mistaken for a criminal and, according to some reports, the lawyer who is currently defending García Uribe has also been threatened” (CNDH, Informe Especial, supra note 66, folio 2230; IACHR, The Situation of the Rights of Women in Ciudad Juárez, supra note 64, folio 1749, and Amnesty International, Intolerable killings, supra note 64, folio 2294). 373 The Commission and the representatives indicated that, in January 2006, Mr. García’s lawyer was murdered in circumstances that remain to be clarified. However, the only evidence in the case file is the testimony of a journalist, which the Court rejected based on its form (supra para. 106). 374 Cf. decision of discontinuance due to the death of the accused Gustavo González Meza (case file of attachments to the pleadings and motions brief, volume XVIII, attachment 3, folios 6164 to 6166). 375 Cf. Third Criminal Judge of the Bravos Judicial District, judgment handed down in criminal case 74/2004, “Guadalupe Luna de la Rosa et al.” on October 13, 2004 (case file of attachments to the pleadings and motions brief, volume XVIII, folios 6213 to 6398). 376 Cf. Fourth Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the state of Chihuahua, Judgment of July 14, 2005 (case file of attachments to the application, volume X, attachment 83, folios 3422 to 3500).