that revealed the perpetration of the unlawful acts investigated.”71 The prosecutor also ordered that the Ascope preliminary investigation judge be informed of this preliminary investigation,72 requesting him to order the preventive detention of the accused. 73 62. During the investigation, the following procedures were conducted: a forensic biology expertise on the clothes that the presumed victim was wearing when she was detained; 74 an expert assessment of the police baton presumably used; 75 a test to determine the presumed victim’s blood group;76 a psychiatric assessment of Ms. Rojas Marín;77 a psychiatric assessment of the three agents presumably responsible,78 and a judicial inspection and reconstruction procedure.79 Also, various statements were received, including from the four individuals presumably involved.80 63. On May 5, 2008, Ms. Rojas Marín requested “the expansion of the complaint and of the investigation into the crime of torture” pursuant to article 321 of the Peruvian Criminal Code and “[clarification of the] offense of rape […] in order to define the offense appropriately and avoid future nullifications.” She also requested the “disqualification of the representative of the Public Prosecution Service” because he was a colleague of the Ascope provincial prosecutors who were subject to a disciplinary administrative proceeding (infra paras. 68 to 71).81 64. On June 16, 2008, the prosecutor decided not to expand the preliminary investigation to include the crime of torture.82 Ms. Rojas Marín appealed this refusal.83 On August 28, 2008, the First Superior Criminal Prosecutor of La Libertad Judicial District declared the appeal without grounds, indicating that the element of the crime of torture relating to its purpose was not present.84 Cf. Decision of the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service of Ascope of April 2, 2008 (evidence file, folio 110). 71 Cf. Decision of the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service of Ascope of April 2, 2008 (evidence file, folio 111). 72 Cf. Decision of the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service of Ascope of April 2, 2008 (evidence file, folio 112). They were confined in the Trujillo Prison on May 1, 2008, and released on May 5, 2008. Cf. Official note of May 5, 2008 (evidence file, folios 2847 to 2848). 73 74 Cf. Expert report of March 12, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2236). 75 Cf. Expert report of March 2008 (evidence file, folio 104). 76 Cf. Expert report of March 11, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2238). 77 Cf. Psychiatric assessment of August 13, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2733). Cf. Psychiatric assessment of May 23 and 26, 2008 (evidence file, folios 2857 to 2862); Psychiatric assessment of May 30, 2008 (evidence file folios 2850 to 2855), and Psychiatric assessment of August 19, 2008 (evidence file, folios 2864 to 2869). 78 Cf. Videos 1 and 2 of the inspection and reconstruction procedure on August 15, 2008 (evidence file, folder of audiovisual material, “Annex 50” and “Annex 51”) and Record of inspection and reconstruction procedure on August 15, 2008 (evidence file, folios 2896 to 2909). 79 80 Cf. Police report of the Casa Grande Police Station of March 31, 2008 (evidence file, folio 14). 81 Cf. Request filed by Azul Rojas Marín on May 5, 2008 (evidence file, folios 115, 116 and 117). Cf. Decision of the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service of Ascope of June 16, 2008 (evidence file, folio 122). 82 Cf. Request filed by Azul Rojas Marín with the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service on August 1, 2008 (evidence file, folio 138). 83 Cf. Decision of the First Superior Criminal Prosecutor of La Libertad Judicial District of August 28, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2912). 84 18