also died as a result of the attack. The officers fled the scene and did not report the incident to their superiors. B.2) Administrative and judicial proceedings 38. The Judicial Technical Police conducted an investigation in which they concluded that J.C.B. was responsible for the death of Walter Huacón, given that the ballistics test indicated that the projectiles found in his body had been fired from this officer's weapon. Questions persist as the whether the other officers participated in Ms. Mercedes Salazar’s death, as it was reported that they fired shots at the car. However, they did not appear to give statements and did not surrendered their weapons for the corresponding ballistic tests. 39. In view of the facts, a criminal action was filed before the ordinary justice system, which was referred to the police criminal jurisdiction. On March 16, 2000, the Second Court of the Fourth District of the National Police issued charges only against J.C.B. for the crime of simple homicide, whose case went to plenary. Charges against the other agents were provisionally dismissed. Upon appeal, on November 30, 2000, the Second District Police Court upheld the decision of the lower courts to dismiss the case with respect to the five officers; it did the same on November 9, 2001, regarding the decision with respect to J.C.B. He did not to testify during the process, the proceedings were suspended, and the crime was declared time-barred under the statute of limitations on October 11, 2012. 40. Moreover, in April 2000, the family members filed two civil actions for compensation. A court fee equivalent to 1% of the amount of the claim was requested in order to continue with the process, which amounted, in each case, to USD 40,000 (forty thousand United States dollars). As stated in the agreement, “[t]here is no further information on these cases." C) Human rights violations 41. In view of the State's acknowledgment of responsibility in the case and its acceptance of the facts of the case, there is no longer any dispute over the human rights violations committed. With its approval of the friendly settlement agreement (supra paras. 18-26), the Court therefore declares Ecuador responsible for the human rights violations summarized below. 42. The State is responsible for the violation of the right to life, recognized in Article 4(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) of the same instrument, as a result of the extrajudicial executions of Walter Huacón and Mercedes Salazar carried out by police officers who fired at the aforementioned victims in actions that were unjustified, unnecessary, and disproportionate, as well as lacking a legitimate aim. 43. The State is responsible for the violation of the right to personal integrity, recognized in Article 5(1) of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of Walter Huacón and Mercedes Salazar. Both were shot at with firearms while pursued by six police officers. Ecuador acknowledged that Mr. Huacón was pulled from his vehicle and shot in the right leg by a police officer. Mr. Huacón remained alive for a few minutes until he was shot in the 11