session without intervention and assistance of the parties to the proceedings, mainly the accused (supra para. 57).101 On June 23, 2003, said ruling was appealed in cassation by the complainants and, on June 24, 2003, the Public Prosecutor’s Office joined the appeal. However, on July 24, 2003, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation declared the appeal inadmissible on the grounds that it did not meet the legal requirements for its admissibility because contradictory precedents had not been cited.102 62. After the filing of various appeals,103 finally on April 11, 2005, the First Criminal Chamber completely annulled the sentence of Sentencing Court No. 4 of March 28, 2003, and ordered a retrial by another court in which the victim's statement was given only in the presence of the accused's defense attorney.104 63. On March 19, 2004, Sentencing Court No. 1 modified the precautionary measures imposed on E.G.A. replacing the measure of departmental preventative detention with the measure of national preventative detention and changing the period of presentation of the accused before the Court Registrar’s Office from 7 to 15 days.105 D.2 Second oral trial 64. The second trial began on September 15, 2005, before the Sentencing Court No. 2 of Cochabamba (hereinafter “Sentencing Court No. 2”).106 During the trial, testimony was given by the accused,107 the alleged victim, without the presence of the accused,108 the psychologist who treated Brisa after the complaint made on July 15, 2002 (supra para. 52),109 the domestic worker at the 101 Cf. Order issued by the First Criminal Chamber, supra (evidence file, folios 9720 to 9722). Cf Cassation Appeal on the form filed by José Miguel De Angulo and Luz Stella Losada on June 23, 2003 (evidence file, folios 9729 to 9734), and order issued by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation on July 24, 2003 (evidence file, folios 9738 to 9739). 102 103 Cf. Appeal for constitutional protection in execution of sentence presented by José Miguel De Angulo and Luz Stella Losada on November 21, 2003 (evidence file, folios 7895 to 7924); Order issued by the Third Chamber, supra (evidence file, folios 9744 to 9753); Constitutional Ruling 0295/2004-R issued by the Constitutional Court on March 3, 2004 (evidence file, folios 7980 to 7986); Judgment issued by the Second Civil Chamber, supra (evidence file, folios 8050 to 8052), and Constitutional Ruling 1015/2004-R issued by the Constitutional Court on July 2, 2004 (evidence file, folios 8058 to 8069). 104 Cf. Judgment issued by the First Criminal Chamber on April 11, 2005 (evidence file, folios 8123 to 8124). Cf. Record of public hearing to modify the precautionary measures imposed on March 19, 2004 (evidence file, folios 10921 to 10922). 105 106 Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9826 to 9871). E.G.A. described, inter alia, that the sexual relations were consensual; that there was no violence, threats or intimidation between him and Brisa, and at the end of the trial, he indicated that he had been subjected to this process for three years, complying punctually with attendance, he did not escape, even when his own family asked him to do so.” Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9836 and 9870). 107 Brisa explained that E.G.A. hit her when she didn't do what he wanted; She referred to the sexual assaults, and the first time they started; she indicated that she had confused feelings: she loved him, but she also felt “disgusted,” and she indicated that after 3 months she denied pregnancy and told the accused that she had had an abortion. She also indicated that in the United States of America she went to at least ten psychologists. Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9839 to 9840). As she reported, one of the judges told Brisa that he would “throw her out of the [Court]” if she did not stop crying. Cf. Letter from Brisa De Angulo, supra (evidence file, folio 7254). 108 Among her expressions are: having indicated that “there was a lot of guilt” and psychological violence; that Brisa expressed that the first time it happened she felt very uncomfortable and to avoid a repetition of the events she invented a pregnancy, and that Brisa presented indicators common in victims of sexual assault. Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9841 to 9842). 109 21