solely and exclusively to killings.”164 The prosecutor said that according to the testimony of Exequiel Pérez, José Santos Manueles had confessed his involvement “in the death of (…) Carlos Escaleras in that he was one of those who discharged their weapons at the deceased and for which he received the amount of thirty thousand lempiras.”165 The prosecutor stated that there was information that he was living in Houston as a fugitive from justice.166 105. The accusation was admitted by the First-Instance Court on April 2, 2001.167 106. On June 20, 2001, the First-Instance Court ordered the prosecutor to formulate charges within a period of six days.168 On July 18, 2001, prosecutor Alain Díaz filed formal charges against Lucas García for the crime of murder.169 He said that “the facts surrounding [his] death indicate that it was on account of his opposition to the establishment of a palm-oil processing plant belonging to Mr. Miguel Facussé, which influenced the cancellation of a World Bank loan to the Cressida company.”170 He stated that the main suspects in the actual killing were Lucas García, who was under arrest, Leodán Machado, who was a fugitive from justice, and Oscar Escobar, who was deceased.171 The following day the court ruled the charges formalized and ordered the conclusion of the committal stage. 172 107. On July 26, 2001, Mr. Facussé’s attorney denied the accusations and said that the entire situation “has been orchestrated by the Democratic Union Party, priests of the Catholic Church (Pedro Marchetti), Juana Mejía Guerra, agents of the Public Prosecution Service, and officers of the DGIC.”173 He said that “the facts and their origin had been distorted to confuse public opinion.” He also stated that the check presented to the proceedings was false.174 108. On July 30, 2001, the First-Instance Court ordered a judicial inspection of the Lexus company in order to “discover whether its accounts contain records of a check issued to Mr. (…) Salomón Martínez.”175 On August 1, 2001, the judicial inspection was carried out, in which it was found that the account books “contained no check issued to Mr. (…) Salomón Martínez.”176 164 Annex 70. Expansion of criminal charges, dated March 28, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 390-395, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 165 Annex 70. Expansion of criminal charges, dated March 28, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 390-395, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 166 Annex 70. Expansion of criminal charges, dated March 28, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 390-395, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 167 2002. 168 Annex 71. Court document, dated April 2, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, p. 396, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, Annex 72. Court document, dated June 20, 2001, judicial case file, p. 416, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. Annex 73. Formal charges filed by Prosecutor Alain Díaz, dated July 28, 2001, judicial case file, pp. 417-422, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 169 170 Annex 73. Formal charges filed by Prosecutor Alain Díaz, dated July 28, 2001, judicial case file, pp. 417-422, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 171 Annex 73. Formal charges filed by Prosecutor Alain Díaz, dated July 28, 2001, judicial case file, pp. 417-422, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 172 Annex 74. Court document, dated July 19, 2001, judicial case file, p. 422, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. Annex 75. Document of attorney Wilfredo Flores, dated July 26, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 416-425, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 173 174 Annex 75. Document of attorney Wilfredo Flores, dated July 26, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, pp. 416-425, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, 2002. 175 2002. 176 14, 2002. Annex 76. Court document, dated July 30, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, p. 477, annexed to the initial petition of January 14, Annex 77. Judicial inspection, dated August 1, 2001, judicial case file, Vol. II, p. 479, annexed to the initial petition of January 21