14 charge of the case believed the suspect to be dangerous.”34 Present at that location were: José Agapito Ruano Torres, his spouse María Isabel Guevara and his two-year-old son Oscar Manuel Ruano Guevara. 62. According to the brief of the Criminal Investigation Division of the National Civil Police, José Agapito Ruano Torres resisted the arrest and the police agents had to use “necessary force.”35 After they arrested him, the aforementioned brief indicates that the agents verified that the man was indeed José Agapito Ruano Torres by checking his identification card. The brief then notes that Mr. Ruano Torres was shown the administrative arrest warrant issued in his name and that he was made aware of his rights.36 During the search of José Agapito Ruano Torres’s home, the police agents indicated that “they did not find any of the items they were looking for.”37 In addition, in that same brief of the Criminal Investigation Division of the National Civil Police it is noted that José Agapito Ruano Torres said that due to the fact that he did not have the financial means to hire a private lawyer, he requested that a public defender be assigned to him.38 63. With regard to these facts, José Agapito Ruano Torres stated that he was sleeping when approximately twenty police agents broke down the door to his residence and “proceeded to hit him with closed fists; then they threw him on the floor [dragging him] around the house, accusing him of being Chopo and that they continued to kick him with the toes of their boots and caused his right little toe to bleed.”39 Furthermore, he alleged that he was threatened with death so that when he faced the television cameras he would say that “he was being arrested for being a kidnapper and to confess that he was the man nicknamed Chopo.”40 64. His spouse also made statements along the same lines and added that; i) the police agents would ask her if Mr. Ruano Torres was Chopo, and that she would respond that he was not; ii) Mr. Ruano Torres told the agents that his brother was nicknamed Chopo and that he could take them to him; iii) when she gave the agents Mr. Ruano Torres’s identification card, they pulled out his photo and glued it to a blank sheet of paper; iv) they destroyed the furniture and other objects in the residence; and that v) she never saw a legal warrant nor “was she read anything.”41 She also indicated that Rodolfo Ruano Torres had moved out of that house a year before the facts occurred.42 Years later, Mr. Ruano 34 Annex 1. Brief of the investigators of the Criminal Investigation Division of the National Civil Police dated October 17, 2000, page 222, criminal case file 77-2001-2. 35 Annex 1. Brief of the investigators of the Criminal Investigation Division of the National Civil Police dated October 17, 2000, page 222, criminal case file 77-2001-2. 36 Annex 1. Brief of the investigators of the Criminal Investigation Division of the National Civil Police dated October 17, 2000, page 222, criminal case file 77-2001-2. 37 Annex 1. Brief of the investigators of the Criminal Investigation Division of the National Civil Police dated October 17, 2000, page 223, criminal case file 77-2001-2. 38 Annex 1. Brief of the Criminal Investigation Division of the National Civil Police dated October 17, 2000, page 225, criminal case file 77-2001-2. 39 Annex 3. Written communication of José Agapito Ruano Torres to the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman dated February 19, 2001.. Annex to the petitioner’s brief dated December 12, 2003. 40 Annex 3. Written communication of José Agapito Ruano Torres to the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman dated February 19, 2001. Annex to the petitioner’s brief dated December 12, 2003. 41 Annex 4. Statement of María Maribel Guevara de Ruano to the Human Rights Commission of El Salvador. Annex to the petitioner’s observations dated March 19, 2009. 42 Annex 4. Statement of María Maribel Guevara de Ruano to the Human Rights Commission of El Salvador. Annex to the observations of the petitioner dated March 19, 2009.