56 classification of the remains according to age, characteristics and state of preservation, 211 so as to identify the probable depth and area where evidence was located in the grave. In this regard, the forensic archaeologist Luis Alberto Rueda Curimania explained that, in the intervention of March 2010, “we excavated from the beginning of the mine shaft towards the place indicated by the family member [Zenón Cirilo Osnayo Tunque], where there are around 5 cubic meters in an area of 3 x 2, and that is what we investigated and we advanced a little further to see that there was no more evidence left.” He explained that the intervention was carried out taking into account the spot where this relative indicated that he “saw the bodies piled up” in 1991 and that upon leaving the place he “heard three explosions.” 212 For the Court, the absence of a record on the state of the mass grave and of a plan suitable for the conditions at the site meant that, after the interventions of November 2009 and March 2010, in October 2011, when a landslide occurred, new evidence was found. Thus, it cannot be ruled out that skeletal remains may still be found at the site (supra paras. 142 and 143). 181. Sixth, the Court confirmed that in April and May 2010, it was recommended that biomolecular analyses at the genetic level (DNA) be carried out of the skeletal remains recovered in the abandoned “Misteriosa” or “Vallarón” mine between March 1 and 8, 2010. However, the information from the Public Prosecutor’s Office on their processing between 2010 and 2015 is disaggregated and contains serious inconsistencies. Indeed, the information regarding the calculation of the minimum number of individuals “MNI” varies from 8, 13 and 15 probable individuals, according to three reports made in May 2010, October 2012 and February 2015. 213 For the Court, a timely and adequate estimate of the minimum number of individuals in the analysis of the recovered remains is an important aspect in cases such as this, in which it is highly probable that the remains are intermingled. On the other hand, the information on the results of the DNA laboratory tests indicates that four complete genetic profiles were obtained from the recovered remains, which were used to compare with the samples of six family members; however, none of them matched. Regarding the number of incomplete genetic profiles obtained from the skeletal remains, the information ranges from nine profiles to eleven profiles, according to two reports made in October 2012 and February 2015. It should be noted that on March 20, 2014, it was reported that the reprocessing of the nine skeletal remains that resulted with incomplete profiles would be regularized, even though there were “few possibilities of identifying the human skeletal remains.” On February 19, 2015, it was reported that on January 22, 2015, samples from this case had been re-analyzed, and “it was possible to “obtain 3 more complete genetic profiles that probably belonged to the same family group.” 214 See Manual de Investigación eficaz ante el hallazgo de fosas con restos humanos en el Perú Office of the Ombudsman and Peruvian Forensic Anthropology Team-Epaf. Lima, Peru. May 2002. http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/peru/libros/fosas/index.html 212 Statement of Luis Alberto Rueda Curimania in the public hearing held on January 26, 2015. 213 In a first Forensic Anthropological Report of the Ayacucho Forensic Investigations Laboratory of the Institute of Legal Medicine of the Public Prosecutor's Office, prepared from May 3 to 10, 2010, it was indicated that a minimum number of eight bone fragments (individuals) from the mine were identified. On the other hand, in a report of the Public Prosecutor's Office on the results of the DNA laboratory tests, dated October 24, 2012, it is stated that by that date all 13 skeletal remains had been processed. On the other hand, in a Report of the Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetics of the Institute of Legal Medicine of the Public Prosecutor's Office dated February 19, 2015, it appears that from September 20 to 24, 2010, 16 bone fragments were sampled, and that 8 bone samples had already been individualized and 8 bone samples had not been individualized. In addition, it was found that 2 of them shared the same profile, therefore, it would probably be a total universe of 15 individuals. Cf. Forensic Anthropological Report, f “Misteriosa” or “Vallarón” Mine Case, July 23, 2010 (evidence file, folios 4256 to 4307); Odontological Expert Report on the teeth recovered from the “Misteriosa” or “Vallarón” mine on July 23, 2010 (evidence file, folios 4308 to 4323); Results corresponding to the Misteriosa Mine Case, DNA test, Public Prosecutor’s Office, October 24, 2012 (evidence file, folio 5582 to 5595), and Official letter del Molecular Biology and Genetics Laboratory of the Institute of Legal Medicine of February 19, 2015 (evidence file, folios 5510 to 5516). See also, statement of the expert witness José Pablo Baraybar do Carmo at the public hearing held on January 26, 2015. Report of the expert witness José Pablo Baraybar do Carmo of January 26, 2015 (merits file, folio 1239). 214 The report of the Laboratory of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, dated October 24, 2012, on the DNA test results indicated that by that date four complete genetic profiles and nine incomplete genetic profiles had been obtained. The complete profiles were used for comparison with the samples from family members; however, none of them matched. This information was reiterated by units of the Public Prosecutor’s Office on May 28, 2013, and March 20, 2014. On the 211