70. In March 1996, MINUGUA put out a new report in which it stated that "the Army continued trying to exonerate its personnel and sought to obstruct the judicial investigation.”81 It said that "several soldiers stated confidentially that both during and after their return to the base they were coached on what they had to say, both by superior officers and by the Army’s attorneys, in order to give the same distorted version of the events.82 As an example illustrating this situation, the IACHR takes note of the documents submitted by the petitioners in relation to interviews given by the soldiers who were on the patrol, who said that they had to shoot because the villagers wanted to take their weapons.83 This, in spite of the fact that the CEH concluded that there was only the incident of the woman who attempted to take the sergeant's weapon. 71. The State advised that on May 14, 1996, the Criminal Court of First Instance of the Department of Alta Verapaz conducted a judicial inspection of the scene.84 72. On May 30 and 31, 1996, the Court of First Instance for Criminal Matters, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes of the Department of Alta Verapaz voided the pretrial detention orders on the eight patrol members.85 In that regard, the CEH questioned the way the lower court judge had acted in the proceeding.86 In particular, the CEH criticized the fact that noncustodial measures had been granted to the eight members of the patrol when the judge had not read the judicial case file.87 According to the CEH, the case file contained 5,000 pages of documents and the judge had received it only a few hours before he issued his decision.88 73. In light of this situation, the petitioner said that the plaintiff Rigoberta Menchú and the Public Prosecution Service filed a complaint over the judge’s actions.89 The CEH said that the alleged anomalies in the way that judge had acted prompted the Supreme Court of Justice to remove him from the case.90 74. On June 29, 1996, the Public Prosecution Service filed an indictment against 25 members of the army patrol involved in the massacre.91 The CEH said that the holding of the oral proceedings was suspended several times.92 75. On May 7, 1997, the Sentencing Court of Cobán, Alta Verapaz, ordered the opening of the trial proper.93 The court also admitted the indictment for the crimes of extrajudicial execution, attempted 81 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 82 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 83 84 Annex 12. Soldiers' interviews, undated. Enclosed with the petitioners' communication received on November 16, 1995. Annex 13. State’s communication of May 24, 1996. Annex 14. Decisions of the Court of First Instance for Criminal Matters, Drug Trafficking, and Environmental Crimes of the Department of Alta Verapaz, May 30 and 31, 1996. Enclosed with the petitioners' communication received on September 10, 1996. 85 86 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 87 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 88 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 89 Annex 11. Petitioners' communication received on September 10, 1996. 90 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 91 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 92 Annex 2. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, Volume VI, Illustrative Cases, Annex 1, Illustrative Case No. 3: Xamán Massacre. 93 Annex 15. Order instituting trial proceedings of May 7, 1997, Second Court of First Instance for Criminal Matters, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes of the Department of Alta Verapaz, Coban Enclosed with the petitioners' communication received on March 30, 1999. 16