Maracay, Aragua state, asked the Investigation Unit to carry out several procedures urgently.244 Also, in 2006, new investigative measures were taken.245 195. On February 1, 2007, the Prosecutor asked the “Antonio José de Sucre” Police Headquarters to forward to copy of the logbook for August 8, 1998, and information of which officials had been on duty at this police station that day.246 On February 15, 2007, the Chief of Police indicated that “the logbooks from 1998 […] are not in the Police Station’s archives.”247 196. On April 17, 2007, the Prosecutor filed formal charges against four police agents before the Court of First Instance for the crime of complicity to commit intentional homicide. In his brief, he concluded “that Benito Antonio Barrios was killed by a police team that, while it went to attend an incident, did not justify the death sufficiently.” He also indicated that more than eight years had passed, so that the offense of undue use of a firearm had “evidently prescribe[d],” and therefore requested the dismissal of the criminal action for this crime, and required that “the preventive measure of deprivation of liberty be ordered” against the four individuals.248 244 Specifically: (a) to obtain photographs taken of the corpse of Benito Antonio Barrios on August 28, 1998; (b) the results of the fingerprints taken on the body, and (c) to take several statements, cf. Note N. 05-FTRJPV17736-05 of the Prosecutor for the Transitory Procedural Regime of Maracay, Aragua state, of November 1, 2005 (file of attachments to the Report 11/10 of the Commission, tome I, attachments 1 to 5, folio 3095). 245 Thus: On January 5, 2006, Eloisa Barrios, Víctor Daniel Cabrera Barrios and Jorge Antonio Barrios Ortuño testified again before the Investigation Unit. On July 10, 2006, the Investigation Unit, in response to the Prosecutor’s request of November 1, 2005, advised that “no photographs were taken” in the preliminary inquiry in the case. On July 27, 2006, the Investigation Unit ordered, inter alia, a ballistic trajectory appraisal. On August 14, 2006, photographs were taken of the scene of the death; however, “the […] ranch where the incident had occurred no longer existed because the building had been demolished since becoming uninhabited.” Despite the foregoing, on August 31 and September 1, 2006, the police made a technical inspection of the site and surveyed it. The interviews previously requested with several witnesses and next of kin were conducted. On August 28, 2006, the Investigation Unit requested a hematological test to determine the blood type of a probative element sent to that office on September 15, 1998. The results, forwarded on September 6, 2006, indicated that “it [was] not possible to determine the blood type, owing to the negligible amount of material. On September 4, 2006, a report was prepared analyzing and reconstructing the events in order to establish the ballistic trajectory. Cf. Records of interview with Eloisa Barrios, Víctor Daniel Cabrera Barrios and Jorge Antonio Barrios Ortuño on January 5, 2006 (file of attachments to the Commission’s Report No. 11/10, tome I, attachment 1, folios 2933 to 2942); Records of interviews with Héctor Enrique Machuca Arriechi and Mauro Apolinar Morales by the Investigation Unit on January 16, 2006; Record of criminal investigation of the Investigation Unit of July 10, 2006; Memorandum No. 9700-081SDVC4421 of the Investigation Unit of July 27, 2006; Record of criminal investigation of the Investigation Unit of August 14, 2006; record of police technical inspection by the Investigation Unit of August 31, 2006, and Memorandum No.9700-064-LC.3491.06 on the planimetric survey by the Investigation Unit of September 1, 2006; Records of interview with Carmen Elena Colorado, Antonio José Ojeda, Eloisa Barrios, Lilia Ysabel Solorzano Barrios, Jorge Antonio Barrios Ortuño and Darelbis Carolina Barrios by the Investigation Unit on August 16 and 17, 2006; Memorandum No. 9700-081-SDVC-5114 of the Investigation Unit of August 28, 2006; Expert report No. 9700-064-DC-4078-06 of the Investigation Unit of September 6, 2006, and report on the reconstruction and analysis of the facts No. 9700-064-DC-3490.06 of the Investigation Unit of September 4, 2006 (file of attachments to the Commission’s Report No. 11/10, tome I, attachment 1, folios 3097 to 3102, 3104, 3106, 3113, 3116 to 3120, 3122, 3123, 3125 to 3137, 3139, 3141, 3142, and 3144 to 3147). 246 Cf. Note No. 05FTMCM-0682.07 of the Prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Service for the Transitory Procedural Regime of Aragua state of February 1, 2007 (file of attachments to the Commission’s Report No. 11/10, attachments 1 to 5, tome I, folio 3153). 247 Cf. Note No.114/07 of the Head of the S.A.R.A. and Operations Division of the “Antonio Jose De Sucre” Central Police Station of February 15, 2007 (file of attachments to the Commission’s Report No. 11/10, attachments 1 to 5, tome I, folio 3156), and Note No. BB-07 of the Chief Inspector of the Barbacoas Police Station of February 7, 2007 (file of attachments to the Commission’s Report No. 11/10, attachments 1 to 5, tome I, folio 3154). 248 Cf. The prosecution’s indictment brief of April 17, 2007, supra note 63, folios 4477 to 4497. 65