paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”69 It founded its decision as follows: “several unlawful acts exist that merit deprivation of liberty and proceedings on them have not prescribed”; moreover, “there are well-founded indications to consider that the accused was an author or participant in the perpetration of previously defined unlawful acts.”70 In short, it affirmed that “a summary of the elements yielded by the investigation […] indicates that he knew about the facts before and after they occurred and since there is a reasonable presumption of risk of flight or of obstruction of the search for the truth concerning a specific act under investigation based on an assessment of the circumstances of the specific case, under the heading of article 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (that is, owing to the risk of flight, because it is presumed that the accused may evade the charges pressed by the Public Prosecution Service), and under its paragraphs 2 and 3 (that is owing to the punishment that could be imposed based on the concurring offenses and the extent of the damage caused, because damage was caused to property and persons), and article 252 with regard to the risk of obstruction (because the accused may himself, or through the other co-accused, destroy, modify or alter the evidence), the court rejects the defense counsel’s request that one of the precautionary measures established in article 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure be imposed on the accused.”71 70. In addition, the Eleventh Court decided that Mr. Díaz Peña should be detained at the DISIP headquarters in El Helicoide, Caracas.72 On February 26, 2004, the same court issued an order of imprisonment against Raúl José Díaz Peña.73 71. Lastly, in a decision of February 27, 2004, the Eleventh Court proceeded to provide the grounds for the ruling made in the “hearing for the presentation of the accused,”74 stating that, “having made the corresponding review of the procedural records in this file,” it found that there [were] sufficient indications to prove the perpetration of the offenses” that Mr. Díaz Peña was charged with, and for which a punishment was established of “up to six years’ imprisonment; criminal proceedings had not prescribed because the acts were committed very recently that merit[ed] the punishment of deprivation of liberty,” and that “there were well-founded indications to consider that RAUL JOSE DIAZ PEÑA [was] presumably an author and participant in the perpetration of the acts of which he was accused,” as well as “a reasonable presumption […] of risk of flight or of obstruction of the search for the truth, as established in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of article 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure”; also observing that there was “a risk of flight by the said individual owing to the punishment that could be imposed and the extent of the damage caused,” and “risk of obstruction because the said individual could influence the co-accused, witnesses or experts to provide false information, or behave in a disloyal or reticent manner jeopardizing the investigation that is underway, the truth about the facts, and that justice is done.”75 69 Record of the hearing for the presentation of the accused held before the Eleventh Examining Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Caracas Metropolitan Area on February 26, 2004 (evidence file, tome V, folio 2757). 70 Record of the hearing for the presentation of the accused held before the Eleventh Examining Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Caracas Metropolitan Area on February 26, 2004 (evidence file, tome V, folios 2755 to 2768). 71 Record of the hearing for the presentation of the accused held before the Eleventh Examining Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Caracas Metropolitan Area on February 26, 2004 (evidence file, tome V, folios 2755 to 2768). 72 Cf. Record of the hearing for the presentation of the accused held before the Eleventh Examining Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Caracas Metropolitan Area on February 26, 2004 (evidence file, tome V, folios 2755 to 2768). 73 Cf. Imprisonment order No. 012-04, issued by the Eleventh Examining Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Caracas Metropolitan Area, on February 26, 2004 (evidence file, tome X, folio 5678). 74 Ruling of the Eleventh Examining Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Caracas Metropolitan Area on February 27, 2004 (evidence file, tome X, folios 5680 to 5685). 75 Ruling of the Eleventh Examining Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Caracas Metropolitan Area on February 27, 2004 (evidence file, tome X, folios 5680 to 5685). 22