family’s house,110 another psychologist, 111 José Miguel de Angulo112 and the mother of the accused113. A total of five hearings were held with a duration of between 21 minutes and 7 hours and 16 minutes, and five prosecution witnesses, one defense witness and two experts from the complainants and/or the Public Prosecutor’s Office testified.114 65. In a hearing on September 15, 2005, the Sentencing Court No. 2 of Cochabamba decided to exclude evidence from the forensic medical certificate of July 31, 2002, at the request of the accused's defense.115 On conclusion of the trial, on September 23, 2005,116 the aforementioned Court unanimously acquitted E.G.A. The ruling indicated, among other aspects, that (i) there was no efficient investigation attributing elements of the conviction; (ii) due to “evidentiary weakness” it could not conclude whether the sexual intercourse “constituted consensual sexual intercourse or sexual assault or whether there was actually sexual intercourse, because there is no forensic medical certificate that confirms such a situation”; (iii) it took as a proven fact that there were behavioral changes in the alleged victim “resulting from traumatic situations,” but found no evidence that linked them to E.G.A., and (iv) there was no evidence that E.G.A.'s behavior had invalidated Brisa's sexual freedom. Furthermore, it concluded that “it had not been possible to identify guilt or intent in the conduct of the accused because sexual relations between cousins causes discomfort in society, but it is not a crime, and that the aggravating circumstance applicable to rape between relatives requires violence and “in this case, no violence or intimidation was observed.”117 66. The issuance of the acquittal ruling provided for the cessation of all personal precautionary measures that had been imposed on E.G.A. to date.118 On September 28, 2005, Sentencing Court No. 2 ordered the removal of precautionary measures against E.G.A.119 67. On October 8 and 11, 2005, the complainants and the Public Prosecutor's Office, respectively, appealed the sentence.120 On March 1, 2006, the oral arguments hearing in support of the appeals was held.121 On March 6, 2006, the First Criminal Chamber confirmed the appealed sentence, considering, inter alia, that it had not been proven that the victim had been “frightened in such a way as to constrain her will and ability to resist.”122 This ruling was appealed in cassation by the complainants on March 22, 2006. On November 16, 2006, the First Criminal Chamber annulled the Ms. C.M. highlighted the change in Brisa's attitude after the arrival of the accused. Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9844 to 9845). 110 R.M.Q. pointed out that the tests carried out on Brisa showed traces of sexual violence and signs of post-traumatic stress. Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9849 to 9850). 111 112 In his testimony, José Miguel De Angulo indicated that Brisa began to change and became aggressive after the arrival of the accused. In addition, he narrated her trip to the United States of America and the discovery of the sexual assaults. The statement was interrupted because the witness was “very nervous.” Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9851 to 9852). M.C.A. indicated that it was very common to see Brisa show “attention” towards the accused, she caressed him and put her hand under his shirt. Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folio 9863). 113 114 Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folios 9826 to 9871). 115 Cf. Record of oral trial hearing from September 15 to 20, 2005 (evidence file, folio 9854). Mr. De Angulo stated that the deliberation of the sentence lasted 45 minutes. Cf. Statement of José Miguel De Angulo, supra (evidence file, folio 11441). 116 117 Cf. Judgment issued by Sentencing Court No. 2 on September 16, 2005 (evidence file, folios 10737 to 10738). 118 Cf. Judgment issued by the Sentencing Court No. 2, supra (evidence file, folio 10738). 119 Cf. Decision issued by Sentencing Court No. 2 on September 28, 2005 (evidence file, folio 8334). Cf. Appeal filed by the Public Prosecution on October 11, 2005 (evidence file 8558 to 8566) and brief of appeal presented by Filiberto Camargo and María Leonor Oviedo Bellot, representing Brisa De Angulo Losada, on October 8, 2005 (evidence file, folios 11025 to 11047). 120 121 Cf. Record of hearing of oral reasoning for a restricted appeal issued by the First Criminal Chamber on March 1, 2006 (evidence file, folios 8621 to 8626). 122 8631). Cf. Restricted appeal ruling issued by the First Criminal Chamber on March 6, 2006 (evidence file, folios 8629 and 22