20 He stated that he has been practicing forensic medicine for 14 years, during which time he has performed “more than 4,000 autopsies and 1,200 of these were for homicides”. Regarding the youths found dead in the San Nicolás Woods, he declared that the forensic analysis report in the case contained important information, such as the fact that the youths had not been killed in the place where the bodies were found. He stated that two of the victims, those who were found on June 16, 1990, had died that day before 3.30 a.m. or at 5.30 a.m. at the latest; the other two, whose bodies were found the following day, were also killed on June 16, 1990, but after 3.30 a.m., approximately 12 hours later. He stated that the two groups of youths that were found died at different times. He affirmed that the autopsy report on Henry Giovanni Contreras shows that there were three wounds from a firearm, but there could have been four or five. He indicated that one of the photographs shows that, in view of the type of wound, the firearm was “let’s say, less than six inches away; it was very close”. He added that there are signs that the shot was fired when the youth was alive, not afterwards. Regarding the modus operandi used in the homicide of the alleged victims, he stated that it was the same in all the cases “because they have multiple shots to the head”. Moreover, to the question of whether the youths died during a fight in which they might have defended themselves and also attacked their aggressors, he pointed out that there was no evidence of this and that it was very probable that they had been fired upon at very close range. Furthermore, he stated that Henry Giovanni Contreras “received three shots [from] behind”. He added that, contrary to the usual practice in his profession, in this case, steps were not taken to locate and record certain information that could have helped in the identification, such as photographs, fingerprints or dental studies. He stated that the forensic medicine reports that were prepared in this case are poor, because there were wounds that are visible in the photographs, that were not recorded in the reports and because it is not possible to relate the photographs of the bodies to the official numbers on the autopsy reports. Moreover, he stated that the photographs are only of the face so that it is not possible to see if there were wounds in other parts of the body. He indicated that each of the autopsies of the victims was performed in 30 minutes, and that it is not possible to perform an autopsy well in such a short period of time. He concluded by saying that, from what can be seen in the reports, the homicides of the youths were premeditated. With regard to the case of Anstraum Aman Villagrán Morales, he stated that the victim was on the ground when he was shot and he therefore inferred that this homicide was also a premeditated act. b. Report of Alberto Bovino, Expert in criminal law, criminal procedural law and human rights He stated that, when the hearing was being held, he was working on a book on the rights of the victim in Guatemalan criminal proceedings and Costa Rican law and that he had a fairly detailed knowledge of the court files in the instant case and the now rescinded Criminal Procedural Code, which was in force when the case was being processed.