15 62. After carrying out the expert analysis of this document on December 16, 1991, the graphology specialists of the National Police of Peru concluded that the signature appearing on it “came from the hand of [Jeremías Osorio] because it displays a series of graphic characteristics consistent with the signature that appears on the electoral roll.” Regarding the fingerprint that appears on the lower part 59 of document, they concluded that “it is not from the right index finger, but it could be from another digit.” On the evidentiary value of the expert analysis conducted by the National Police on December 16, 1991, the Supreme Court of Justice ruled as follows in its resolution of June 24, 2010: Upon its assessment by the experts in the cross-examination, they stated that to perform the comparison they only had the entry in the electoral roll that was sent from Cajatambo, which appears on p. 2494, a document that is eleven years old […] contradicting what they themselves said in the oral proceedings, when they stated that to perform the expert analysis they needed contemporaneous signatures, taken as meaning two years earlier or later. Four: It is therefore not a suitable document for performing a comparison of signatures and fingerprints such as the one that was carried out, since the time that has gone by could have affected the clarity of the samples in question, which would prevent a sound conclusion from being reached; that circumstance allows 60 us to have valid doubts regarding the certainty of the scientific test […]. 63. The Commission draws attention to the fact that when the arrest took place on April 28, 1991, the members of the Army patrol guarding Jeremías Osorio Rivera prepared no record of his capture, of the search of his person, or of the confiscated items. The IACHR notes that the judicial authorities currently working on the criminal proceedings intended to cast light on the incident have established that the whereabouts of Jeremías Osorio has remained unknown since he was detained by personnel from the Cajatambo Countersubversive Base. In its resolution of June 24, 2010, the Supreme Court of Justice found it highly unlikely that the victim could have been released on May 1, 1991, only to 61 disappear voluntarily immediately after. 64. According to statements given by the residents of Cochas-Paca and by Lt. Juan Carlos 62 Tello, on the date of the incident there was a National Police station in Gorgor district, a few hours from the community of Nunumia where Jeremías Osorio was initially taken into custody. The statements made by Mr. Simeón Refuerto Roque, who was the mayor of Cajatambo in 1991, indicate that the province’s 63 Countersubversive Base was a few meters away from an office of the prosecution service, which underscores the irregularity of the actions of the soldiers who took Jeremías Osorio to a military facility, instead of handing him over to the competent authorities. It should be noted that the soldiers who arrived at the Countersubversive Base between April 30 and May 1, 1991, prepared no written record of the 59 Annex 25: Judgment of December 17, 2008, issued by the National Criminal Chamber in the criminal prosecution of Juan Carlos César Tello Delgado, case file No. 554-07, section 5, “During the Oral Proceedings,” No. 10, “Ratification of the expert graphology technicians Luis Gerardo Montesinos Aguilar and César Melesio Aliaga Rojas.” 60 Annex 35: Resolution of the Temporary Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of June 24, 2010, case file No. 1101-2009, whereas clauses three and four. Annex to the petitioners’ communication of November 25, 2010, received by the IACHR on December 8 of that year. 61 Annex 35: Resolution of the Temporary Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of June 24, 2010, case file No. 1101-2009, whereas clauses three and four. 62 Annex 25: Judgment of December 17, 2008, issued by the National Criminal Chamber in the criminal prosecution of Juan Carlos César Tello Delgado, case file No. 554-07, section 2, “Statement of the Accused,” recording Juan Carlos Tello’s declaration that “he maintains that he did not hand the detainees over to the police station in Gorgor, which was the closest, because he had not been ordered by his commanding officer to do so”; and section 5, “During the Oral Proceedings,” No. 2, containing the witness statement of the villager Aquiles Román Atencio, stating that “in Cajatambo the prosecutor’s office is about a hundred or a hundred and fifty meters from the military base, and that there was a police station in Gorgor district, which is two and a half hours away from Cochas Paca.” 63 Annex 25: Judgment of December 17, 2008, issued by the National Criminal Chamber in the criminal prosecution of Juan Carlos César Tello Delgado, case file No. 554-07, section 5, “During the Oral Proceedings,” No. 6, in which Mr. Simeón Refuerto Roque “says that the Cajatambo Prosecutor’s office was located 400 meters from the military base…”