20 Criminal Code sets forth that any military officer found guilty of a common crime must be submitted to the jurisdiction of the ordinary criminal courts, and that when a crime punishable under both Codes is committed, the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts will prevail; therefore, the Supreme Court found that the First Instance Court on Juvenile Criminal and Correctional Matters, First Division, of Villarrica Judicial District, had jurisdiction over proceedings against corporal 2nd class López-Insfrán regarding the violent death of the minor Vargas-Areco. 71(15) Proceedings before ordinary courts were delayed due to formal requirements. From 1991 to 1997, investigations on the instant case were paralyzed. 71(16) Indeed, various members of the Armed Forces were asked to render testimony before ordinary courts, firstly on February 19, 1990. The Armed Forces answered said request and alleged that the case was under investigation before the military jurisdiction. After the Supreme Court of Justice found that the ordinary courts had jurisdiction to hear the case, the military officers failed to appear to render testimony. The appropriate witnesses rendered testimony after September 18, 2000; i.e. more than ten years after the first call for evidence. 71(17) On April 10, 2001, the Criminal Assessment and Judgment Court of Villarrica Judicial District declared the investigation closed regarding the accused corporal 2nd class López-Insfrán and set the case for full trial. In view of the additional evidence proposed, an order was entered on November 27, 2001, to extend the scope of the investigation regarding Captain Eduardo Riveros, to be joined as defendant. Later, testimony was also received from a retired general and two active officers of the Paraguayan Army, and further evidence was submitted, including re-evaluations of the medical report. 71(18) On May 31, 2002, due to the accusations of torture filed by the complainants and the inconsistencies between the report of the physician who removed the corpse on December 31, 1989, and the report of Dr. José de Ribamar Cruz e Silva of January 1, 1990, the Court ordered that a third examination be performed. On May 6, 2002, physician Mario J. Vásquez-Estigarribia established that, pursuant to the photographs of the corpse of Gerardo Vargas-Areco, the cause of death was an “wound on the back of the left hemothorax […] related to an entry orifice caused by a gunshot […] between the 6th and 7th interspinal right sub scapular space.” Moreover, it was established that “the alleged burns […] correspond to putrid ichorous emphysema of the corpse (once the putrefaction process begins, subcutaneous fluid gas blisters appear) that looks like a burn after popping upon contact.” 71(19) On September 22, 2003, October 3, 2003, and October 26, 2003, physicians Octaviano Aquiles Franco-Saggia, Fausto Ricardo Paredes-Pavón and Elida Salinas-Ramírez, respectively, issued expert reports on the photographs of the corpse of Gerardo Vargas-Areco. The experts found that the injuries detected were consistent with the natural putrefaction process of a dead body. 71(20) On June 14, 2004, upon request by the State’s attorney, the Court ordered that further expert opinions be requested on the photographs of the corpse of the minor Vargas-Areco. On July 5, 2004, physician José G. Bellassai-Zayas issued a report, whereby he stated that “given that the autopsy performed on the body is not available, it is difficult to establish the cause of death with certainty,” and added