30 Also that of BRUCE CAMBELL HARRIS LLOYD, because, in his capacity of Executive Director of the Casa Alianza Association, it is inferred that he lacks impartiality, since this social assistance organization shelters and protects street children, including the deceased, so that it is subject to partial disqualification. [...] With regard to the statements of MARIA EUGENIA RODRIGUEZ (minor), GUSTAVO ADOLFO CONCABA CISNEROS (minor), AIDA PATRICIA CAMBARA CRUZ, JUAN JOSE MENDEZ SANCHEZ (minor), JULIA GRISELDA RAMIREZ, MICAELA SOLIS RAMIREZ and ROSA ANGELICA VEGA, [...] none of them directly named the defendants, and other means of evidence are needed in order [...] to reach the legal conviction that [the defendants] are responsible for the facts [investigated]. [...] The declarations of the […police] investigators are in the same conditions as those mentioned previously, because they do not name the defendants as the authors of these execrable crimes either directly or indirectly. 113. In the same judgment, the court refers to the following documents: a) report of the investigation conducted by the National Police Force, which records, among other circumstances that Julia Griselda Ramírez López “identified NÉSTOR FONSECA LÓPEZ and SAMUEL ROCAEL VALDEZ ZÚÑIGA, in the [k]ardex of the unit’s personnel”, and indicated that they were responsible for the murder of Anstraum Aman Villagrán Morales; it was established that Fonseca López and Valdez Zúñiga worked for the National Police Force; it was recorded that Valdez Zúñiga had as equipment a “thirty-eight caliber Taurus revolver, registration number [...] (1481127)” and that “the bullet, the head of which was found on inspecting the body of the minor Villagrán Morales, was fired by the said arm”; b) report of the Deputy Head of the Fifth National Police Unit from which it appears that on June 25 and 26, 1990, agent Valdez Zúñiga “left this unit at 8.00 to go off-duty”; report of the Head of the Criminal Investigations Department of the National Police Force in which it is repeated that Samuel Rocael Valdez Zúñiga and Néstor Fonseca López were members of the said Police Force and that the type of arm issued to Fonseca López had not been established; and d) descriptive records of the identification of the bodies in the case “corresponding to persons who died violently due to gun wounds”. Regarding all these elements, the judge of the Third Criminal Sentencing Court concludes that “the foregoing is insufficient evidence to be certain of the participation of the defendants in the illegal criminal acts that are attributed to them”. 114. Lastly, the first instance judgment asserts that The same situation arises with regard to the legal identification formalities practiced [...] from which it is clear that WALTER ANIBAL CHOC TENI, JULIA GRISELDA RAMIREZ LOPEZ and MICAELA SOLIS RAMIREZ did not identify the persons who are alleged to be responsible from among the persons that were put in front of them, only the minor GUSTAVO ADOLFO CISNEROS CONCABA [sic], stated that the defendant NESTOR FONSECA LÓPEZ was among those persons, but this fact does not change the situation. 115. The first instance judgment concluded by delivering an “ACQUITTAL” in favor of the defendants. 116. The Office of the Attorney-General filed a remedy of appeal against the judgment as soon as it was notified; the court granted the remedy and forwarded the case file to the Fourth Chamber of the Court of Appeal.