B.3. Other measures requested 128. The Commission asked that the State ensure the existence and implementation of effective judicial remedies to address reports of police abuse in the context of their authority to stop and search. The representatives asked that the State annul the judgments convicting Mr. Fernández Prieto and Mr. Tumbeiro. They asked that the State verify that the sentences imposed following the domestic proceedings not be included as a criminal record in the National Registry of Reoffenders or in any other public records or, if applicable, that any annotation of this type be eliminated. They also asked that the State make a “marginal annotation” in the decisions of the Supreme Court of Justice concerning the two cases indicating that these rulings and the proceedings that led to them had been declared incompatible with the American Convention. The State did not comment on these measures. 129. The Court considers that, in this case, the absence of available judicial remedies has not been proved, but rather their inadequate response to the violations of the rights of Messrs. Fernández Prieto and Tumbeiro. Thus, the Court considers that it is not appropriate to order the creation of new judicial remedies. Regarding the measure requested by the representatives, the Court notes that the rights of Messrs. Fernández Prieto and Tumbeiro are no longer being violated by the police, administrative or judicial records owing to the proceedings followed against them. Consequently, the Court considers that the delivery of this judgment and the reparations ordered herein are sufficient and appropriate; therefore, the said measure is not granted. C. Compensation C.1. Pecuniary damage 130. The Commission asked that the State make full reparation, both pecuniary and nonpecuniary, for the human rights violations. It added that, to this end, it should be taken into account that both the initial stop and search procedure, and the subsequent judicial proceedings, pre-trial detention and criminal conviction were not in keeping with the requirements of the American Convention. It affirmed that all these facts took place based on the initial procedures carried out by the police officers. 131. The representatives requested monetary reparation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage. Regarding compensation for pecuniary damage, consequential damage and loss of earnings, they indicated that the time that had elapsed from the arbitrary police detentions to date, as well as the death of Mr. Tumbeiro, made it difficult to calculate the items to be compensated appropriately. However, they argued that, previously, the Court had accepted to provide compensation for this item under the principle of equity even in the absence of vouchers to support it. They indicated that the following should be assessed in the case of Mr. Fernández Pietro: (a) the harm derived from the impossibility of obtaining employment while he was in detention and subsequently, and (b) his loss of earnings as a result of his criminal conviction. With regard to Mr. Tumbeiro, they indicated that the Court should take into account: (a) the sum disbursed to pay the fine included in his sentence, equivalent to 150 pesos, and (b) the expenses he incurred while seeking a place to carry out his community service, and the consequent time he was unable to carry out his usual work. Based on the foregoing, they requested payment of monetary compensation to the victims, to be determined based on the age, training and activities of the victims at the time of the facts. The State did not comment on this measure. 132. In its case law, this Court has developed the concept that pecuniary damage supposes the loss of, or detriment to, the income of the victims, the expenses incurred as a result of 40