a moving vehicle fired at them with assault rifles, as they were riding a motorcycle” and describes the five weapons that participated in the events according to the shell casings that were found.133 The Court also finds that there were a series of shortcomings in the police report and in the visual inspection carried out by the Justice of the Peace on December 8, 2006, as well as in the autopsy carried out on December 10, 2006. These aspects were reaffirmed by the expert witness Olga Marta Roldán in her statement before the Court on March 7, 2019, where she also specified that there were a series of irregularities in the processing of the crime scene.134 174. In addition, this Court considers that this series of omissions have, from the day of Mr. Valenzuela's death to the present, made it impossible to clarify the facts or diligently investigate, prosecute and, where appropriate, punish the possible perpetrators of the events, despite the fact that almost 13 years have passed since the beginning of the investigation. 175. In consideration of: (i) the creation of the “Gavilán Plan” for the search and recapture of the 19 fugitive prisoners from “El Infiernito” maximum security prison; (ii) the extrajudicial executions promoted by the State between 2005 and 2006 to end the lives of the aforementioned 19 fugitives under “Operation Gavilán” and its parallel structure; (iii) the internal decisions that determined that once the fugitives were captured they should be executed extrajudicially, which is consistent with the assertions by the CICIG, and the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Executions; (iv) the fact that Mr. Valenzuela was a fugitive from justice and persecuted by State agents under “Operation Gavilán”; (v) to the death of Mr. Valenzuela on December 8, 2006, along with another fugitive from the “El Infiernito” prison; (vi) the negligence in the crime scene processing due to the set of omissions in the investigation of the facts to clarify his death, and (vii) the ongoing impunity in this case, the Court concludes that the State is responsible of the extrajudicial execution of Mr. Valenzuela Ávila, in violation of the right to life enshrined in Article 4(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Tirso Román Valenzuela Ávila. C. Conclusion 176. This Court determines that the State violated the right to life enshrined in Article 4(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Tirso Román Valenzuela Ávila. VIII-4 RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT, TO DIGNITY AND TO A PRIVATE LIFE 135 Expert opinion of the National Institute of Forensic Sciences, Ballistics Section of November 19, 2009 (file of annexes to the brief with pleadings, motions and evidence, annex 40, fs. 12237 to 12240). 134 Such as: the crime scene was not cordoned off, there is no sketch of the scene; there is no description of the method used to collect the evidence; there was no chain of custody of the collected elements; the corpses were not individualized and marked; deficiencies in the collection of ballistic evidence, the position of a motorcycle found at the crime scene is not documented; the photographs presented by the Public Ministry in which they are taken in the morgue of the Judicial Branch present some deficiencies such as the numbered photographs not having a logical order, and they were taken without forensic techniques, the clothes were not packed; there is an inadequate description of the wounds, the autopsy or video were not photographed, blood samples were not taken, nor viscera for the toxicology tests that must be done in violent deaths; in the conclusions of the autopsy protocol we do not see the main objectives of a protocol that are the cause of death, the date of death, the identification and the manner of death; In the visual inspection there was no use of forensic techniques such as photography, video, and panoramic, intermediate and close-up shots, the evidence collected at the crime scene, has no connection with the photographs, the video and the plan, and its origin cannot be identified. 133 135 Articles 5 and 11(2) of the American Convention. 43