cases. In one case, the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court of Constanta informed that, based on their checks, no notes regarding traumatic marks were submitted to the prosecutor units. The person deprived from freedom was prosecuted for the crime of murder stipulated under art. 188 par. (1) of the Criminal Code, and the injury was considered in order to solve the case, since the person deprived from freedom declared, during the criminal prosecution, that it had been stabbed by the victim of the murder; the same prosecution notice decided to dismiss the cause for the crime of hitting or other violent acts stipulated by art. 193 par. (2) of the Criminal Code. In another case, the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court of Constanta informed that the note regarding the finding of traumatic marks was communicated on 07.05.2018 to the prosecutor unit regarding the criminal case where investigations were performed concerning the person deprived from freedom for the perpetration of murder as stipulated by art. 32 par. (1) of the Criminal Code corroborated with art. 188 of the Criminal Code. During the investigations, the person deprived from freedom constantly claimed that the injuries were caused by the injured person, who had physically assaulted him; the evidence showed that his claims were not supported. An indictment was drawn up in the case, mentioning that the person deprived from freedom did not file a criminal complaint for the crime of hitting or other violent acts stipulated by art. 193 of the Criminal Code. Regarding the other cases, the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Judge’s Office of Constanta asked for additional information with a view to identifying criminal files. ● pursuant to the visit performed at C.R.A.P. Teleorman, the visit team of the Field regarding prevention of torture took note of the fact that, during 2017, the presence of signs of body violence was seen in 8 cases, and in 2018, until the performance of the visit, in 5 cases. They were included in the medical records and in the protocols drawn up upon imprisonment, under the signature of the person deprived from freedom. In 5 cases, the persons stated that they had been assaulted by police bodies during their arrest. In two cases, the persons did not show traces of violence, according to the provided protocols. For the other 3 cases, based on bodily search protocols upon introduction to the preventive detention and arrest 57