96. Regardless of whether a crime was detected in flagrante in this case, whenever an arrest is made by an authority, Mexican law makes a distinction between two moments in determining the scope of control over the arrest. The first moment is the immediate referral of the suspect to the competent authority by the person making the arrest. The second moment is the referral by the Public Prosecutor to a judge within a term of 48 hours. 97. In the instant case, according to documents in the case file, and without passing judgment on the alleged irregularities in relation to some evidence on which the following facts would be based (infra paras. 143 to 149), the arrest of Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel, and their subsequent referral to the competent authority apparently occurred as follows: a) On Sunday, May 2nd, 1999, at 4:30 p.m., Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel were arrested, when they were allegedly caught in flagrante, committing the crime of carrying prohibited and unlicensed weapons and in possession of poppy and marijuana; 126 b) On Tuesday, May 4th, 1999, at 8:00 a.m., the Prosecutor of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Arcelia visited the scene of the crime to inspect the body of Salomé Sánchez Ortiz, without taking custody of the alleged victims. 127 Later, after midday, members of the Army transferred Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel by helicopter to the headquarters of the 40th Infantry Battalion, located in the city of Altamirano. 128 According to the case file, at 6:00 P.M. on that same day, Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel were brought before the respective authority of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Arcelia; 129 c) On Wednesday, May 5th, 1999, at 4:00 p.m., the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Arcelia forwarded the inquiry to the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office of Coyuca de Catalán, citing its lack of jurisdiction; 130 d) On Thursday, May 6th, 1999, Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel were transferred to the offices of the Federal Public Prosecutor in the city of Coyuca de Catalán. 131 That same day, at 3:00 a.m. and 4:00 a.m., the alleged victims rendered a second statement before the Public Prosecutor's Office. 132 The Agent of the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office recorded the preliminary investigation under number 33/CC/99, and found sufficient elements to prove the probable criminal responsibility of the alleged victims. 133 At 6:06 p.m. the latter were brought before the First Instance Court of the Mina Judicial District, which opened case file 126 Cf. Complaint filed by three soldiers, supra note 66, page 4213. 127 Cf. Record of transfer of personnel and others of May 4, 1999, supra note 65, page 4205. 128 Cf. CNDH. Recommendation N° 8/2000 of July 14, 2000, supra note 89, page 8447. 129 Cf. Certification of May 4, 1999 (Preliminary Inquiry N° CUAU/01/119/999) (File of attachments to the application, volume XI, page 4211). 130 Cf. Transfer proceeding based on lack of jurisdiction of May 5, 1999, supra note 72, page 4239. 131 Cf. Amplification of the preliminary statement of December 23, 1999, supra note 67, page 10367. 132 Cf. Statements of Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel before the Public Prosecutor's Office of Coyuca de Catalan of May 6, 1999 (Preliminary Inquiry 33/CC/999) (File of attachments to the answer brief, volume XXIII, pages 9777 to 9785). 133 Record of court order of May 6, 1999 (Preliminary Inquiry N° 33/CC/999) (File of attachments to the answer brief, volume XXIII, pages 9798 to 9821). 36