while in the presence of an unidentified individual carrying a firearm. She also stated that the Prosecutor told
her that she could not accuse Luis Carrera Almoina or his father because “they were innocent.”87 Linda
López’s parents also allege that in the days following the rescue, the 33rd Prosecutor tried to take her
statement “for a full week at different times,” even when she had recently been operated on and could not
speak. They alleged that even under these conditions, the Prosecutor proceeded to interrogate her, and Linda
“had to answer in writing on a piece of paper.”88 No disciplinary investigation was undertaken into these
allegations against the aforementioned prosecutor.89
85.
According to the case file, the following procedures and tests were performed in the context
of the investigation:
i)
Report on a police interview of Linda Loaiza López on July 26, 2001, at the University
Hospital Clinic, carried out by officials of the Technical Unit of the Judicial Police of the Chacao Police
Station.90
ii)
Expert examination of the Toxicology Division of July 27, 2001, performed on “certain
objects” found in the apartment where Linda Loaiza López was rescued, giving the following results: “one
(01) gram and six hundred (600) milligrams of marijuana and chlorohydrate cocaine residue.”91
iii)
Visual inspection of July 27, 2001, carried out by male officials of the National Directorate of
Criminal Investigations of the Technical Unit of the Judicial Police at the University Hospital of Caracas to
assess the physical condition of Linda Loaiza López.92
iv)
Test of the Forensic Toxicology Division of the Technical Unit of the Judicial Police of July 30,
2001, performed on an “envelope, made of yellow plastic […] various pieces of partially burned paper [… and
a] homemade pipe […],” also collected from the place of rescue. The examination detected the presence of
“one (01) gram of marijuana […].”93 This evidence was also not photographed.94
v)
Forensic legal blood and semen analysis on August 25, 2001, carried out by the Department
of Microanalysis of the National Directorate of Criminal Investigations on two pillows, a duvet, a sheet, and a
segment of cloth from a blouse showing “[…] samples of blood and hair;” and a pair of “men’s underwear [...]
with semen samples.” Although it says the hairs were collected for testing, the information available in the
87 See, among other sources: Annex 4. Decision of the Twentieth First Instance Trial Tribunal of the Caracas Metropolitan Area.
Case No. 20.-253. November 5, 2004. Statement of Linda Loaiza López Soto, pgs. 117-124. Annex D of the brief from the petitioners, July
14, 2009.
88 See: Annex 7. Sworn statement of Nelson López and Paulina Soto before the Colombian General Consul in Venezuela. April
25, 2002. Annex “11 Varios” of the brief from the petitioners, June 20, 2014. Also see: Annex 29. Brief written by Juan Bernardo Delgado,
in his capacity as Linda López’s legal representative, to National Assembly Deputy César López, stamped as received on November 26,
2001. Annex “Folder No. 5, National Assembly” of the initial petition of November 12, 2007; and Annex 30. Brief written by Juan
Bernardo Delgado to the Attorney General of the Republic, stamped as received on November 14, 2001. Annex “Folder No. 1, Office of the
Attorney General” to the initial petition of November 12, 2007.
89 Annex 31. Official Letter No. DID-16-1224-65772 of the Director of Inspection and Discipline Office of the Attorney General
of the Republic, September 28, 2004. Annex G2 of the brief from the petitioners, July 14, 2009.
90
Cited by the State in its brief of observations of October 22, 2014, pgs. 7-8.
91
Cited by the State in its brief of observations of October 22, 2014, pg. 8.
Annex 32. Visual Inspection No. 064. Case File No. F-935.981. National Directorate of Criminal Investigations Technical Body
of the Judicial Police. Chacao Police Station. Caracas, July 27, 2001, pg. 47. Annex A-7 of the brief from the petitioners, July 14, 2009.
92
93
Cited by the State in its brief of observations of October 22, 2014, pg. 11.
Annex 4. Decision of the Twentieth First Instance Trial Tribunal of the Caracas Metropolitan Area. Case No. 20.-253.
November 5, 2004, pg. 208. Annex D of the brief from the petitioners, July 14, 2009.
94