recuse herself and asked that she be taken off the case. 45 The petitioner notes that on 7, 2006, the case was assigned to the 13th Court of First Instance (for Trial), whose proceeded to recuse herself on March 14, 2006. She argues that the case was assigned 23rd Court of First Instance (for Trial) and that the defense of General Felipe Rodríguez that the proceeding be joined; that motion was granted. March judge to the asked 23. The petitioner notes that the defense of General Felipe Rodríguez sought the recusal of the judge of the 23rd Court, which was granted, and the case was assigned to the Fourth Court of First Instance (for Trial). She argues that on October 18, 2006, the Fourth Judge of First Instance (for Trial) sought to recuse herself from the case 46 as a result of which it was assigned to the 29th Court. Nonetheless, the Court of Appeals declared that the recusal was unfounded 47 and the case went back to the Fourth Court. Accordingly, the petitioner argues that dilatory practices have permeated the whole procedure. 24. She alleges that on September 18, 2007, the Fourth Court of First Instance (for Trial) of the Criminal Judicial Circuit for the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, constituted as a one-person court, began the oral phase of the trial. She alleges that on February 29, 2008, in the context of the trial, Silvio Mérida Ortiz gave testimony before the Fourth Court and stated that he had been the victim of torture and pressures by officers from the Office of the Prosecutor to get him to incriminate Raúl José Díaz Peña. 48 She notes that period of final conclusions was on April 28, 2008, and the verdict was read on April 29, 2008, and was formally published on June 17, 2008. She indicates that Raúl José Díaz Peña was convicted and sentenced to nine years and four months imprisonment, as he was found to be the perpetrator responsible for committing the crimes of conspiracy (agavillamiento), aggravated arson as facilitator, and concealment of explosive substances. 49 The petitioner alleges that the judge made a change in legal characterization at the moment of handing down the verdict, without giving notice to the accused, impeding him from preparing his defense as per Article 350 of the COPP. She argues that on July 23, 2008, the Eighth Court (for Enforcement) received the verdict from the Fourth Court, and proceeded to definitively compute the sentence on July 25, 2008. 50 She notes that the judge determined that the alleged victim could accede to the benefits established in the law to serve the sentence. She notes that the judge determined that the alleged victim could 45 The petitioner cites the 22nd Court of First Instance (for Trial) of the Judicial Circuit for the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, Act of recusal, December 5, 2005. Attached to petitioner’s brief of June 13, 2006. 46 The petitioner cites the Fourth Court of First Instance (for Trial) of the Criminal Judicial Circuit for the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, Act of recusal, October 18, 2006. Attached to the petitioner’s brief received at the IACHR November 22, 2006. 47 The petitioner cites the Court of Appeals of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Judicial District for the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, Case No. 2146-2006 (CI) S-6, October 20, 2006. Attached to petitioner’s brief received at the IACHR November 22, 2006. 48 The petitioner cites the Fourth Court of First Instance (for Trial) of the Criminal Judicial Circuit for the Metropolitan Area of de Caracas, Act of Oral and Public Trial, Case No. 4J-397-06, Statement of the accused Silvio Mérida Ortiz. Attached to the petitioner’s brief received at the IACHR October 2, 2008. “[Danilo Anderson] threatened me … and afterwards came Dr. Landaeta and he also threatened me not only with me but with my children, for me to make a statement, change my version, and in fact they called by house by phone and threatened that if I didn’t change the version they were going to kill my children … they made strong threats against me, I had to yield, they made calls to my house threatening my children, they spent one year in hiding, I didn’t see them for a year, and things happened in this way, I had to revoke my attorneys due to pressures … I completely, roundly retract what I said, because I was subject to mistreatment and torture totally to intimidate and to inculpate persons who I didn’t even know, others I did, and I am not aware of those persons having done anything….” “(1) Mérida when did you meet Fénix. A: Known as such, at the Plaza Altamira, in other words I would see him at the Plaza Altamira once I arrived, I think I saw him in December, because of course I don’t recall when he arrived, I always saw him, but not like any contact, I met him at the DISIP, and that his name was Raúl Díaz ….” 49 The petitioner cites the Fourth Court of First Instance (for Trial) of the Criminal Judicial Circuit for the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, Act of Oral and Public Trial, Case No. 4J-397-06, April 28 and 29, 2008. Attached to the petitioner’s brief received at the IACHR October 2, 2008. 50 The petitioner indicates that the Eighth Court noted, with respect to Raúl José Díaz Peña that “in consideration of the sentenced imposed on him (9 years and 4 months in prison) and the time of his preventive detention (4 years and 5 months), it is noted expressly that what remains of his sentence, after time served, is four (4) years and eleven (11) months, which will have been served on June 25, 2013.” Court of First Instance of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Judicial District for the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, Eight Court (for Enforcement), Case No. 8-E-1755-08, July 25, 2008. Attached to the petitioner’s brief received at the IACHR October 2, 2008. 8