CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 1 février 2005

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 72 February 2005 Fonseca Mendes v. Spain (dec.) - 43991/02 Decision 1.2.2005 [Section IV] Article 2 Article 2-1 Life Death at police station and effectiveness of the investigation: inadmissible   As part of an investigation into drug trafficking, two police officers attempted to arrest the applicant’s brother; he escaped and ran off. He was eventually detained and taken to a police station where he collapsed in a semi-conscious state before reaching the cells. Medical treatment was rapidly administered but he died. A judicial investigation was opened to establish how and why death had occurred. The applicant, sister to the deceased, lodged a criminal complaint against the two police officers, alleging murder, together with an application to join the proceedings as a civil party. The officers were questioned, as were persons who had witnessed the arrest and the dead man’s final moments. Two autopsies were carried out, a third forensic specialist drew up a report and a toxicological analysis was conducted. Other investigations and tests were conducted with a view to obtaining probative evidence. The investigation ended with a ruling that there was no case to answer: the evidence indicted that death had not resulted from blows to the applicant but had been the result of natural causes. The applicant appealed unsuccessfully. Inadmissible under Article   2: In this case, a conclusion that death was linked to the actions of State employees or their failure to react was based more on hypothesis or speculation than reliable evidence. As to the effectiveness of the domestic investigation into the circumstances of the death, an investigation had immediately been opened and the investigating judge had visited the locations concerned. The investigation involved two autopsies, a medical report by a third forensic specialist, a toxicological analysis, questioning of persons who had witnessed the events preceding death, inspection of the sites and examination of various relevant documents. The three forensic specialists had appeared before the court and had answered questions posed by the applicant. In reaching their decisions, the courts had given a full and logical explanation, on the basis of all the probative evidence and especially the forensic medical reports, for preferring the theory of death from natural causes and for considering that the contrary evidence did not undermine their findings. The applicant had been able to participate effectively in the investigation before and after joining the proceedings as a civil party: manifestly ill-founded.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes