50. Also on August 28, 2003, in the presence of the chief of the 20th Prosecutor’s Office, “a medical examination and legal autopsy” was performed on Mr. Castillo’s corpse, in which a bullet and a piece of shrapnel were collected, identified and labeled for expert assessment. 51. On August 29, 2003 the Office of the Attorney General ordered the 20th Prosecutor’s Office, either jointly with or separately from the 11th Prosecutor’s Office, to take part in the inquiry into Mr. Castillo’s death. 52. That day the CICPC summoned an individual to an “interview”. In addition, the authorities received from Mrs. Moreno a physical description of the perpetrators of the attack against her on August 27, 2003, and they “interviewed” an eyewitness to the incident. Furthermore, between August 29 and October 28, 2003, “the forensic medical examinations” were performed on Mrs. Moreno and Luis Castillo. 53. On September 2, 2003 the chief of the 20th Prosecutor’s Office, accompanied by CICPC officials, visited "L" street of the "Tinaquillo Dos" residential area, in order to “interview” people with knowledge of the incident. They contacted three people, who were interviewed that same day. In addition, police officers and officials of the 20th Prosecutor’s Office visited the premises of the Vicariate, where an employee of that organization reported that they had received a call the previous day in which threats were made against the Director and against the Vicariate of Machiques. The 20th Prosecutor’s Office requested that the “prosecutor’s unit” be provided with the record of incoming calls to the telephone [number] [...], during the period between 11:30 [am. and] 12:30[pm.] on Monday [September 1, 2003, and that it be informed of the number [and] location of the subscribers to those phone numbers that appear listed. 54. On September 5, 2003, “interviews” took place with two employees of the Vicariate. Both said they had no knowledge of any threats made against Mr. Castillo or that he had been in contact with guerrilla groups or organizations involved in drug-trafficking. One employee mentioned that “on two occasions [they] received visits from the [Office of Intelligence and Prevention Services ([DISIP [)], inquiring about [their] work.” She added that the previous year a man who had worked with Mr. Castillo had been murdered, presumably by “Colombian paramilitaries.” She said he had entered Venezuela as a “refugee” and that, according to information received by Mr. Castillo, following that person’s absence from work, it was learned that he was the right-hand man of a commander of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (hereinafter “FARC”). She also stated that Mr. she can provide information on the facts, and officially submit it to the Forensic Medicine Service so that it can prepare the respective forensic report [;] 4) [s]end [Luis Castillo] to the Forensic Medicine Service to undergo the relevant medical examination [and,] once the legal reports have been prepared, collect the results [;] 5) [v]isit the Hospital Clínico of Maracaibo to “interview” the doctor (s) treating [Mrs. Moreno] and [Luis Castillo] to determine their state of health. Likewise, […] collect any evidence of criminological interest obtained during the operations perfomed on the injured (bullet shells, fragments, etc.) which, observing appropriate [c]hain of [c]ustody standards, shall be deposited in the Recovered Objects Section of said criminal investigations unit [;] 6) [c]arry out a visual inspection and expert examination of the vehicle [in which Mr. Castillo, Mrs. Moreno and Luis Castillo were traveling[;] 7) [t]ransfer to the Zulia Branch office [of the CICPC] the 9mm bullet casings collected at the scene of the crime, in order to conduct a ballistic comparison between these and determine whether they were fired by the same type of weapon [;] 8) “interview” the circle of people (friends, family members, work colleagues, etc.) closest to the victims [of the crimes] in order to investigate any element that could lead the Attorney General’s Office to investigate the motive for the crime [, and] 9) [a]ny other action deemed pertinent to clarify the facts under investigation which, with prior coordination with the Attorney General’s Office should be practiced in order to fully identify the alleged perpetrators of the attack.” 15