the destruction or manipulation of evidence.71 The judge considered that there was the required degree of probability that Scot Cochran was the author of the wrongful act attributed to him, because the Judicial Investigation Department had conducted a series of procedures and received witness statements to this effect. In addition, he considered that that there was a latent risk of flight because he was a foreign national and his family lived in the United States of America and this, added to his income, could facilitate his departure from the country.”72 54. In this decision, the judge expressly ordered that an official communication be sent to the Embassy of the United States of America informing it of Scot Cochran’s detention,73 based on the rule established by session 19-02 of the Superior Council of the Judicature, which obliged judicial operators to notify the consular authorities when one of their nationals was arrested. The judicial order for pre-trial detention and the communication addressed to the consular authorities of the United States of America were notified to Scot Cochran the same day at 8:30 p.m., and his signature recorded.74 The communication with information on the court order was addressed to the Embassy and contained an error in Scot Cochran’s name, but the court order with the correct name was attached.75 55. The communication addressed to the Embassy of the United States of America included information on the arrest, the case number, the crimes for which Scot Cochran was investigated, and the order requiring his pre-trial detention, in order to advise the diplomatic representation of the situation.76 56. On May 7, 2003, Scot Cochran stated that an official from the Consulate of the United States of America had called him to verify whether he had received his medicines because he suffered from a chronic sexually transmitted disease for which he received regular treatment.77 Also, on March 18, 2003, an official from the United States Consulate sent Scot Cochran a copy of a letter from his sister by local mail.78 57. The case file also contains two communications from Scot Cochran’s doctor at the detention center addressed to an officer of the United States Consulate; one dated May 8, 2003, concerning Scot Cochran’s medication,79 and the other dated May 13 that Cf. Ruling of the Criminal Court of San José, at 6:55 p.m. on January 20, 2003, ordering six-months pre-trial detention for Scot Cochran (evidence file, folio 44). 71 Cf. Ruling of the Criminal Court of San José, at 6:55 p.m. on January 20, 2003, ordering six-months pre-trial detention for Scot Cochran (evidence file, folio 47). 72 Cf. Ruling of the Criminal Court of San José, at 6:55 p.m. on January 20, 2003, ordering six-months pre-trial detention for Scot Cochran (evidence file, folios 48 and 49). 73 Cf. Notification of the ruling that orders informing the Embassy of the United States of America in Costa Rica of Scot Cochran’s situation (evidence file, folio 7337). 74 Cf. Ruling of the Criminal Court of San José, at 6:55 p.m. on January 20, 2003, ordering six-months pre-trial detention for Scot Cochran (evidence file, folios 42 al 49). 75 76 Cf. Note addressed to the Embassy of the United States of America in Costa Rica dated January 20, 2003, advising that pre-trial detention had been ordered against Scot Cochran, and also with regard to his alleged crimes (evidence file, folio 7339). Cf. Official communication JSM-CAISH No. 052-03 of the Ministry of Justice, Medical Services, CAI, San José dated May 7, 2003 (evidence file, folio 7476). 77 Cf. Copy of the fax sent by an official of the Consular Section of the Embassy of the United States of America in Costa Rica, dated March 19, 2003, addressed to the deputy director of the CAI La Reforma (evidence file, folios 7472 and 7473). 78 79 Cf. Copy of the fax sent by Dr. AS to the consular officer of the United States of America on May 8, 2003, with regard to Scot Cochran’s medical treatment (evidence file, folios 7468 and 2499). 16