hypothesis that on November 18, 2002, the Costa Rican Drug Control Police arrested Luis Archbold Jay, Enrique Archbold Jay and three other crew members, all Colombian nationals, for “apparent [commission of] international drug-trafficking,” after a joint patrol operation between Costa Rica and the United States reported that a speed boat “threw packages that apparently contain[ed] cocaine into the sea and headed towards Costa Rican territory.” 419 The Archbold Jay brothers filed an appeal in cassation against this judgment as well as five motions for review between 2004 and 2009. The rulings issued in these defense proceedings are analyzed below to determine whether the alleged victims were able to obtain a full review of the conviction, in accordance with Article 8(2)(h) of the Convention. B.2.1. Petition for writ of cassation 301. On July 9, 2004, Luis Archbold Jay and Enrique Archbold Jay filed a writ of cassation against the second conviction, stating: “[In relation to abbreviated procedure, that the judge's task should be] to prevent the parties from making a pact against the Constitution and imposing a sanction that goes against the guarantees of the accused. [They also stated] 1. Failure to observe the rules of substantiation because in order to support its conclusions [...] the court [...] used evidence that was neither obtained in accordance with the law nor legally incorporated into the proceedings [...]; 2. [T]here is no correlation between indictment, evidence, and sentence [since] [...] [...] the alleged statements made by several members of the United States armed forces should have been disregarded because they were not submitted in advance of the trial […][;furthermore...] it affects the chain of custody of the evidence [...] that the Public Prosecutor's Office did not seize the totality of the evidence; 3. That the sentence is essentially based on spurious and unusable evidence [...] [since] the evidentiary activity involving the inspection of the drugs aboard the John Hall ship, was carried out by the prosecution behind the backs of the accused and their legal representatives; 4[...] [T]he evidence of decisive value was assessed and evaluated without taking into account the rules of sound judgment [...].5 The trial court ordered the imposition of a prison sentence without stating the grounds for such decision […]; 6[…] the trial court [relied on] evidence illegally obtained and introduced into the proceedings, as a consequence of the violation of the essential chain of custody in relation to the supposed drugs seized on the high seas and the sample that was handed over to the Costa Rican Prosecutor’s Office by the U.S. authorities.” 420 302. As noted, the appellants’ arguments can be grouped into three issues: i) the claims that the abbreviated procedure was agreed upon against the guarantees of the accused; ii) the statements that alluded to the alleged illegality of the evidence, as well as to the inadequate assessment of the evidence, and iii) the lack of grounds to justify the sanction imposed. Cf. Official communication D.PCD-1509-2002 of the Anti-Drug Police of Costa Rica, of November 19, 2000 (file evidence, folio 1891) and Judgment 68-2004 Trial Court of the Southern Zone Sur, Golfito, of June 14, 2004 (evidence file, folios 33779 to 33786). To support its decision, the court considered that: i) the existence of the illegal substance transported (cocaine) was established based on the analysis that the Analytical Chemistry Section of the Judicial Investigation Agency of Costa Rica performed on the packages recovered after the aforementioned pursuit (which culminated with the arrest of the defendants), and ii) the participation of the defendants was confirmed in a report of the prosecutor that refers to their arrest. This coincides with the “discovery record” which reports that officers of the Anti-Drugs Police, the preventive police and anti-narcotics agents, arrived at the place where “officers of MINAE” were guarding the boat in which the defendants were traveling; another police report describing the arrest of the defendants and stating that they were the ones operating the seized vessel; a note from the Embassy of the United States of America confirming the arrest of the defendants and the seizure of the drugs, accompanied by three photographs showing five people in a boat; translations of documents in English describing the pursuit and the coordinates where the event occurred; as well as the defendants' acceptance of the facts of which they were accused made freely, spontaneously and with the advice of the corresponding defense counsel. For all these reasons, it accepted the request for abbreviated proceedings and imposed a sentence of twelve years imprisonment on the grounds that the defendants formed a gang; they transported a large quantity of drugs; they tried to evade justice and to erase the evidence by throwing the drugs into the sea; and being foreigners, they chose Costa Rican territory to carry out illicit activities. 420 Cf. Decision No. 2004-0924 of the Court of Criminal Cassation of the Second Judicial Circuit of San José, of September 9, 2004, (evidence file, folios 33738 and 33739). 419 94