32 indicated that they corresponded to the “Protocol for the forensic examination to detect injuries resulting from torture on live persons” and, second, the existence of forensic reports prepared in 1993 (supra para. 73 and infra para. 245). Consequently, the prosecutor asked the Institute of Forensic Medicine to advise whether it was necessary to perform other medical examinations on Gladys Espinoza or, in any case, to advise on the documents or actions required to issue a ruling so as not to duplicate the examinations that had already been performed and thus avoid unnecessary delays. In a decision of October 5, 2012, the prosecutor reiterated these requests. 130 There is no record in the case file of an answer from the Institute of Forensic Medicine. The prosecutor also conducted the following investigative procedures: a) On October 16, 2012, he asked the Forensic Clinical Division of the Criminalistics Unit of the Institute of Forensic Medicine to perform the medical examination known as the “Protocol for the forensic examination to detect injuries resulting from torture on live persons” on Gladys Espinoza. 131 Accordingly, on October 24, 132 and December 13, 2012, 133 the prosecutor was advised of the names of the doctors who had been assigned to perform this evaluation. Following several communications and the coordination of efforts to carry out this evaluation of Gladys Espinoza in the Chorrillos Women’s Prison, including access for the doctors and the necessary items, 134 on March 21, 2013, the prosecutor was advised that the evaluation had not been performed because this case of torture required a digital and an analogical camera, a film camera and two laptops. 135 Once the internal arrangements had been made within the Institute of Forensic Medicine, 136 on October 2, 2013, the Prosecutor was advised of the names of the doctors who would perform the evaluation, the dates of which it would be carried out, and the devices to be used. 137 b) On December 19, 2012, 138 and March 11, 2013, 139 the prosecutor asked the Forensic Clinical Division of the Institute of Forensic Medicine to issue a report on forensic report No. 0-1816-H of May 18, 1993 (infra para. 166), which had concluded by indicating, “deflowering not recent; indications compatible with recent unnatural act.” This was in order to understand “the time frame considered when indicating a ‘recent unnatural act.’” In response, the Forensic Clinical Division sent the prosecutor a forensic report 130 Cf. Decision of the prosecutor of October 5, 2012 (evidence file, folios 8607 and 8608). 131 Cf. Note No. 08-2008-3FPS-MP-FN of the Third Criminal Prosecutor to the Institute of Forensic Medicine of October 16, 2012 (evidence file, folio 8615). 132 Cf. Note No. 313-2012-MP-FN-IML-JN-GECRIM/DICLIFOR/PSQ of the Institute of Forensic Medicine to the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecutor of October 24, 2012 (evidence file, folio 8625). 133 Cf. Note No. 397-2012-MP-FN-IML-JN-GECRIM/DICLIFOR/PSQ of the Institute of Forensic Medicine to the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecutor of December 13, 2012 (evidence file, folio 8783). 134 Cf. Note No. 08-2008-3FPS-MP-FN of the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecution Unit to the Chorrillos Women’s Prison of November 7, 2012 (evidence file, folio 8636); Note No. 27-2012-3FPS-MP-FN of the Third Supraprovincial Criminal Prosecution Unit to the National Penitentiary Institute of December 18, 2012 (evidence file, folio 8801), and Note No. 08-2012-3FPS-MP-FN of the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecution Unit to the Institute of Forensic Medicine of March 11, 2013 (evidence file, folio 8922). 135 Cf. Report of the Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecution Unit of March 21, 2013 (evidence file, folio 8941). 136 Cf. Note No. 08-2012-3FPS-MP-FN of the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecution Unit to the Institute of Forensic Medicine of March 22, 2013 (evidence file, folios 8945 to 8946), and Decision of the Prosecutor of May 9, 2013 (evidence file, folio 10788). 137 Cf. Note No. 1080-2013-MP-FN-IML-JN-GECRIM/DICLIFOR/PSQ of the Institute of Forensic Medicine to the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecutor of October 4, 2013 (evidence file, folio 11388). 138 Note No. 08-2012-3FPS-MP-FN of the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecution Unit to the Institute of Forensic Medicine of December 19, 2012 (evidence file, folio 8805). 139 Note No. 08-2012-3FPS-MP-FN of the Third Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecution Unit to the Institute of Forensic Medicine of March 11, 2013 (evidence file, folio 8921).