- 51 - women, ten (10) of them involved in this case, 180 and requested measures of reparation for these individuals.181 136. On September 27, 2011, the Fourth Criminal Trial Court of Toluca (hereinafter, “the Fourth Criminal Court of Toluca”) decided that the Public Prosecution Service’s request lacked legal grounds and substantiation with regard to the crimes of torture, abuse of authority and personal injuries because there was “inconsistency and a lack of clarity with regard to the [three] offenses”; consequently, it refused to issue the arrest warrant against the twenty-nine police agents.182 On February 17, 2012, the PGJEM Public Prosecution Service corrected the criminal case against the twenty-nine police agents and again requested their arrest. 183 After postponing the decision owing to the dimensions of the case, 184 on April 9, 2012, the Fourth Criminal Court of Toluca again refused to issue the requested arrest warrants considering that the purpose of the acts had not been proved, in order to classify them as torture.185 Following an appeal by the Public Prosecution Service on April 12, 2012,186 on July 17, 2012, the Toluca First Collegiate Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the state of Mexico confirmed the refusal to issue the arrest warrant against twenty-six state police agents and issued arrest warrants against the three police agents responsible for the three trucks, who had the obligation to supervise and regulate the conduct of the others, because they appeared to be those probably responsible for perpetrating the crime of torture against Ana María Velasco Rodríguez, Yolanda Muñoz Diosdada, María Cristina Sánchez Hernández, Suhelen Gabriela Cuevas Jaramillo, Bárbara Italia Méndez Moreno, Claudia Hernández Martínez, Norma Aidé Jiménez Osorio, Angélica Patricia Torres Linares and another two women who are not part of this case. 187 137. On March 22, 2013, it was decided to dismiss the case against the twenty-nine state police agents initially accused of the offenses of abuse of authority and injuries, and also the case against the twenty-six agents for whom arrest warrants for the crime of torture had not been María Patricia Romero Hernández does not appear as a possible plaintiff in this case. Cf. Indictment (evidence file, folios 5020 to 5024), and Order to constitute the First Criminal Trial Court in Toluca of October 15, 2014 (evidence file, folios 1633 to 2481). 180 Cf. Order to constitute the First Criminal Trial Court in Toluca of October 15, 2014 (evidence file, folios 1643 to 1648); indictment of September 14, 2011, of the Agent of the Public Prosecution Service (evidence file, folios 5295, 5345, 5376, 5413, 5448, 5469, 5540, 5541, 5607 to 5609, 5662 to 5672), and communication 2131700040/240/2011 of the Public Prosecution Service of the PGJEM dated September 14, 2011 (evidence file, folio 5673 to 5680). 181 Specifically, it indicated that the Public Prosecution Service “unduly divides up the definition of the offense because the crime of torture has a purpose, which is not to harm the victims; rather the purpose to obtain from the victims certain acts that harm them” and the purpose of torture is “to obtain from a defendant or from a third party: (a) a confession’(b) information about a fact; (c) omission of an act; (d) any other conduct,” and that obtaining this harms the person. Order of the Fourth Criminal Trial Court of the Toluca Judicial District of September 27, 2011 (evidence file, folios 5705 to 5727). 182 Cf. Brief of the Public Prosecution Service of the PGJEM with the corrected criminal case and requesting arrest warrants of February 17, 2012 (evidence file, folios 5730 and 5731). 183 Cf. Order of the Fourth Criminal Trial Court of the Toluca Judicial District of February 23, 2012 (evidence file, folios 6629 to 6631). 184 Cf. Order of the Fourth Criminal Trial Court of the Toluca Judicial District of April 9, 2012 (evidence file, folios 6924 to 6939, 7022 to 7048, 7184 to 7216). 185 Appeal filed by the Public Prosecution Service of the PGJEM on April 12, 2012 (evidence file, folio 7218); Order of the Fourth Criminal Trial Court of the Toluca Judicial District of April 16, 2012 (evidence file, folio 7221), and Order to constitute the First Criminal Trial Court in Toluca of October 15, 2014 (evidence file, folio 1648). 186 Cf. Ruling of the Toluca First Collegiate Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the state of Mexico of July 17, 2012 (evidence file, folios 7813 to 7815 and 7835 to 7838) and Communication 1618 of the First Collegiate Criminal Chamber of Toluca of the Superior Court of Justice of the state of Mexico of July 17, 2012 (evidence file, folios 7842 to 7844). 187