this meant, for example, that the gunshot residue tests, which make it possible to determine the distance of the weapon being shot […], were not available […]. 237 192. The decision by the War Chamber was upheld on April 5, 2004, by an order of the CSJM Review Chamber, approving the order to dismiss the case “given the lack of evidence to verify the commission of the crime under investigation.”238 The case was permanently dismissed by an order dated September 23, 2004.239 I. Continuation of the criminal case in the ordinary courts 193. An order issued on July 11, 2002 by the Third Special Criminal Chamber of Lima admitted Edgar Odón Cruz Acuña, brother of victim Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez, as a plaintiff in the criminal proceedings against Vladimiro Montesinos Torres, Nicolás de Bari Hermoza Ríos, Roberto Huamán Ascurra and Jesús Zamudio Aliaga for the crime of murder of Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez.240 It also admitted an appeal lodged on June 11, 2002 against the ruling (supra para. 183) that ordered house arrest as a precautionary measure and against the decision not to open an investigation of Fernando Dianderas Ottone, Martín Solari de la Fuente and Herbert Danilo Ángeles Villanueva.241 The Specialized Criminal Prosecutor proposed that this order under challenge be upheld.242 194. An order issued on July 15, 2002 admitted Herma Luz Cueva Torres, mother of victim Herma Luz Meléndez Cueva, as a plaintiff in the criminal proceedings. The Third Special Criminal Chamber required her to verify her kinship, and she submitted the birth certificate, which was received in a brief on December 26, 2002. The above order, however, did not make her a plaintiff in the ordinary jurisdiction. In view of the procedural sequence and in the interest of ensuring judicial protection, the Transitory Criminal Law Chamber of the Supreme Court found in favor of holding her as a plaintiff in the case in its decision to vacate on July 24, 2013.243 195. The Third Special Criminal Chamber issued an order on September 4, 2002 admitting Nemecia Pedraza Chávez, mother of victim Víctor Salomón Peceros Pedraza, as a plaintiff in the same criminal proceedings.244 196. Once the jurisdictional dispute between the military courts and the ordinary courts had been settled, the Third Special Criminal Court continued on September 9, 2002 to hear the Ruling by the War Chamber of the Supreme Council of Military Justice, October 15, 2003 (evidence file, volume XVIII, annex 21 to the State’s answering brief, folios 12143 to 12121). 237 Ruling by the Review Chamber of the Supreme Council of Military Justice, April 5, 2004 (evidence file, volume XXV, helpful evidence, folios 17888 to 17908). 238 Cf. Ruling by the War Chamber of the Supreme Council of Military Justice, September 23, 2004 (evidence file, volume XVIII, annex 21 to the State’s answering brief, folios 12152 to 12151). 239 240 Cf. Order by the Third Special Criminal Chamber, July 11, 2002 (evidence file, volume II, annex 24 to the case submission brief, folio 877). Cf. Order by the Third Special Criminal Chamber, July 11, 2002 (evidence file, volume II, annex 24 to the case submission brief, folio 877). 241 Cf. Order by the Specialized Criminal Prosecutor, November 25, 2002 (evidence file, volume II, annex 25 to the case submission brief, folios 885 to 887). 242 Cf. Ruling by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court on an appeal to vacate judgment, 3521-2012 July 24, 2013 (evidence file, volume XXI, helpful evidence, folio 14670). 243 Cf. Order by the Third Special Criminal Chamber, September 04, 2002 (evidence file, volume II, annex 24 to the case submission brief, folio 889). 244