experts indicated that they should be ruled out because they would have to occur within a "context of asphyxia" as part of a “panorama of injuries.” Another expert said that “asphyxia might have occurred through suffocation concomitant with death,” while a third said that "it would not be possible to say for certain” as “it could be confused with shock caused by the projectile.” The foregoing notwithstanding, one of the autopsy findings was “nail beds,” which, according to the expert himself, “is another symptom” connected with the asphyxiation theory. The Commission notes that neither the judge nor the investigating authorities examined these expert findings in a meaningful way and in conjunction with the evidence found at the crime scene. On the contrary, in pronouncing his opinion on this fact, the Judge of the Second National Police District Court merely said that he found "odd" the attitude of the doctor who referred to the presence of the spots, saying that “he took it upon himself to sign an annex that sowed doubts and undermined the autopsy ... for which he should be severely cautioned.” 150. Likewise, the Commission finds that one of the medical experts said in relation to the alleged “finding of gunpowder on the right hand” that "there are usually always traces ... on the the firing hand”; however, he clarified that he could “draw no conclusions in that regard.” Despite the foregoing, the Commission sees that in the expert findings forwarded by the National Police Commissioner of Riobamba Canton, the determination was “gunpowder test: skin of right hand; negative.” Although subsequent tests indicated the presence of traces of paraffin wax on the right hand or of "nitrite-nitrates," it is not clear what technical assessment was made between those tests and their results, or if the judge or investigating authorities determined what evidentiary value each one had. In addition to the foregoing, nor was the possibility pursued of establishing if there was anything to be found on the left hand given that, according to the testimony of Franklin Antonio García, the hand in which Mr. Valencia was carrying the revolver was his left. 151. In addition to the above inconsistencies, which cast doubt on the results of the investigation, the Commission finds that there is nothing in the record to suggest that any attempt was made to find the bullet that ended Mr. Valencia Hinojosa's life. No evidence connected with the weapons of the two officers who took part in the operation was recovered, ordered, or preserved. Neither the weapons that the policemen Cabezas and Piedra were carrying, nor their bullets, were seized, preserved, or examined by means of ballistic tests in order to clarify, for instance, the number of shots that each fired during the operation, and to determine if any of those projectiles might have been the one that struck Mr. Valencia Hinojosa in the head. The absence of such an essential procedure to get to the bottom of what happened precludes a clear identification of the weapon from which the bullet that ended Mr. Valencia Hinojosa’s life came. 152. In addition, as to the way in which the investigation proceeded, the Commission finds, based on an analysis of all the judicial proceedings and decisions in the police jurisdiction, that the aim was to dismiss the cases against the accused. In that way, the police officers involved ultimately benefited from the prosecution's decisions to abstain from charging them based on a presumption of innocence that operated within the framework of an incomplete and ineffective investigation that lacked independence and impartiality. 153. Thus, although the testimonies raised doubts about the way in which the events were investigated, the judge did not order any confrontations between the various witnesses whose statements contained contradictions or inconsistencies, nor did he examine in greater depth statements suggesting the possibility of a homicide, such as those of Mr. Hlciviades Valdiviezo. Furthermore, the Judge of the Second National Police District Court removed Messrs. “Segundo Márquez” and “Homero Bermeo” from the criminal proceeding, saying that they were not members of the police. The foregoing in spite of the fact that the record clearly states that someone by the name of “Márquez Rodríguez Celestino” was a “Police Corporal Second Class” (Cabo Segundo de Policía) [Translator's note: Segundo is the Spanish word for “second” as well as being a common Spanish name], and that Mr. “Homero Agapito Bermeo” was a “Police Major.” 154. In particular, the Commission observes that the judgment of the Police District Court acquitted with prejudice the alleged culprits, taking into consideration only the statements given by the policemen that coincided with the suicide theory and those who said that shots were fired only into the air, while simultaneously discarding—without any reasoning by which to understand the judge's assessment—