20 said murder was committed with the majority of the elements of this crime, such as MALICE, KNOWN PREMEDITATION, CRUELTY, WITH AN IMPULSE OF BRUTAL PERVERSITY AND ITS HIDING, since the minor Grindi Jasmín Franco Torres was murdered with CRUELTY AND BRUTAL PERVERSITY, THAT UPON RAPING HER HE TORE HER GENITAL ORGANS AND RECTUM, THUS ACTING AGAINST HER QUALITY OF A MINOR AND A GIRL, LATER HIDING HER BODY. As well as the aggravating characteristics included in Article twenty-seven of the Criminal Code, such as: [the] ABUSE OF SUPERIORITY, [the] DESERTED AREA, THE CONTEMPT TOWARD THE VICTIM, AND THE TRICK OF HAVING OFFERED HER TWENTY QUETZALES SO SHE WOULD RUN AN ERRAND FOR HIM TO COMMIT THE CRIME. Therefore, the social dangerousness of the defendant is determined […].31 The Court unanimously and “with legal certainty” concluded that: I) […] the defendant FERMIN RAMÍREZ WITHOUT ANOTHER SURNAME AND/OR FERMÍN RAMÍREZ ORDÓÑEZ is the responsible author of the crime of MURDER AND NOT AGGRAVATED RAPE, as initially presented in the indictment by the Office of the Public Prosecutor, since the evidence produced during the debate, especially the legal medical report regarding the necropsy carried out on the body of the minor GRINDI YASMIN FRANCO TORRES establishes that the cause of death of said minor was asphyxia by strangulation, report that was ratified by Doctor DOUGLAS ERICK DE LEON BARRERA, Forensic Doctor of the Department in the hearing itself of the debate, and not a consequence of the minor’s rape, and that it could have been the case that after the victim had died [Mr. Fermín Ramírez] had carnal access with the body, thus becoming a NECROPHILIA.32. Finally, with regard to the determination of the sentence, it decided that for the “illicit act [of murder], it sentenced [Mr. Fermín Ramírez] to the DEATH PENALTY.”33 54(19) Mr. Fermín Ramírez’s defense counsel presented a special motion of appeal before the Twelfth Chamber of the Appeals Court of Criminal Matters, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes for merit and procedural reasons against the judgment of March 6, 1998 of the Criminal Trial Court, within the term established by law. Likewise, the defense counsel stated that the change in name of the legal classification –rape- to murder, requested by the Office of the Public Prosecutor, constituted an expansion, reason for which a new statement had to be received from Mr. Fermín Ramírez.34 In this regard, the defense counsel stated as […] Reasons of Merit and as sub-reasons: non-observance, wrongful interpretation, and erroneous application of Articles 14 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Guatemala; 8 second numeral of the American Convention of Human Rights and 132 of the Criminal Code; and Procedural Reasons, invoking as sub-reasons the nonobservance 31 Cfr. Judgment of March 6, 1998 issued by the Criminal, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes Trial Court (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 7, folio 98). 32 Cfr. Judgment of March 6, 1998 issued by the Criminal, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes Trial Court (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 7, folio 97). 33 Cfr. Judgment of March 6, 1998 issued by the Criminal, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes Trial Court (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 7, folio 100). 34 Cfr. Judgment of first appeal of May 27, 1998 issued by the Twelfth Chamber of the Appeals Court of Criminal Matters, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes of Guatemala (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 8, folios 102 and 103); and judgment of February 18, 1999 issued by the Constitutional Court, in its quality of extraordinary Court of Amparo (dossier of appendixes to the petition, appendix 10, folio 121).