27 prosecutor also told him that “she had already made her decision” and that in that case the officers “had 159 all their things nicely sorted out.” 137. On January 6, 2004, the CICPC requested the CSOP for its good offices in order to obtain statements from officers Carlos Alexander Rojas, Carlos Andrés Requena, and Freddy Antonio 160 Blanco. That same day, CICPC officials set out on record that when they went to the CSOP they were informed that officers Carlos Alexander Rojas and Freddy Antonio Blanco had been discharged and their 161 whereabouts were unknown. For his part, Carlos Andrés Requena appeared before the CICPC on January 14, 2004, saying that he would not provide a statement and that he ratified everything that he 162 had previously stated. 138. 163 account. Yuribet del Valle Castro came forward on January 16, 2004, and reiterated her 139. On January 28, 2004, the CICPC forwarded a copy of the planimetric study and ballistic 164 trajectory analysis to the Transitional Prosecutor's Office. 140. 165 statement. On February 13, 2004, Ignacio Landaeta Muñoz appeared before the CICPC to provide a 141. 166 statement. On February 16, 2004, María Magdalena Mejías appeared before the CICPC to provide a 142. On February 25, 2004, the Transitional Prosecutor’s Office sent letters to various state agencies: i) To the CICPC requesting the results of the fingerprinting of Eduardo José Landaeta’s 167 corpse; ii) to the Civil Registry Office of the Municipality of Girardot in Aragua State requesting a 168 certified copy of the birth certificate of Eduardo José Landaeta, which was forwarded on March 22, 169 2004; iii) to the Office of the Director of Santiago Mariño Municipal Cemetery in Aragua State, 170 requesting a certified copy of the burial certificate of Eduardo José Landaeta; iv) to the Civil Registry 159 Appendix 8. Official letters addressed to various authorities by Ignacio Landaeta Muñoz (Appendix 1. D to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 160 Appendix 9. Exhibit 1. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 221 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 161 Appendix 9. Exhibit 1. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 222 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 162 Appendix 9. Exhibit 1. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 224 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 163 Appendix 9. Exhibit 1. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 226 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 164 Appendix 9. Exhibit 2. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 230 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 165 Appendix 9. Exhibit 2. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 240. Part of the statement is missing (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 166 Appendix 9. Exhibit 2. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, pages 241 and 242. Part of the statement is missing (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 167 Appendix 9. Exhibit 2. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 243 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 168 Appendix 9. Exhibit 2. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 244 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 169 Appendix 9. Exhibit 2. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 246 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007). 170 Appendix 9. Exhibit 2. Domestic proceeding. Case 4C-4822/04, page 247 (Appendix 2 to the petitioners’ brief with observations on merits of July 18, 2007).