sufficient evidence exists that connects the accused to the offense that is being tried; although the events happened at a time when there was a permanent state of emergency throughout almost all the country owing to the counterinsurgency effort, it is also true that this circumstance would not exempt the accused from executing his functions as established in the norms and directives in force at the time, which indicated that, upon capturing terrorists, they had to be brought before the civil authorities, an instruction that the accused failed to comply with.” 246 135. Based on the arguments presented, this Court will proceed to reach its own decision on the supposed release of Jeremías Osorio Rivera and, to this end, it will analyze the following: (a) the probative value of the “record of release”; (b) the credibility of the testimony of the persons who witnessed the supposed release of Jeremías Osorio Rivera, and (c) the statements of the family members concerning the steps they presume Jeremías Osorio Rivera could have taken. 136. First, this Court observes that the “record of release” is handwritten, and has no stamp or other identifying mark that would allow it to be established where it was prepared; and it does not bear the signature or name of any of the members of the patrol. The graphology appraisal concluded that the signature was that of Jeremías Osorio Rivera and probably the imprint of one of his fingers, but not the right index finger. However, during the proceeding, contradictory versions can be found about the “scientific certainty” of the expert appraisal. Furthermore, no conclusive decision exists as to how the signature was obtained; that is, whether it was provided freely or under coercion. Consequently, there is no evidence that would allow this Court to rule on the possible falsification of the signature on the “record of release” or to state that the said document is a forgery. 137. Nevertheless, the Court considers it appropriate to note that, in both Peru and other countries where enforced disappearances have taken place, there is information that the authorities advise that they have released the person who is alleged to be disappeared as a practice to hide the true fate or whereabouts of the detainee. Thus, in several cases concerning detentions-disappearances that occurred in Peru between 1989 and 1991, the Inter-American Commission has described a variant of the enforced disappearances that consisted in issuing records of release with the signature falsified or obtained by torture, without the victim having been released. 247 In addition, it is pertinent to emphasize that the Peruvian CVR has referred to the method of disappeared-appeared consisting in releasing detainees who the family members believed had disappeared and then, after signature of the release record, even attested by a lawyer, they were once again detained and disappeared definitively. The Vicariate Committee has documented approximately 70 cases of this type that occurred in the region of Ucayali, Pucallpa. 248 Moreover, the European Court of Human Rights 249 and the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances 250 have verified similar practices in other countries. 246 Supreme final judgment delivered by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic on June 24, 2010, fourth considering paragraph (evidence file, volume IV, annex 35 to the submission of the case, folio 1800). 247 47/00. IACHR, Merits Reports Nos. 51/99, 52/99, 53/99, 54/99, 55/99, 56/99, 57/99, 43/00, 44/00, 45/00, 46/00 and 248 Cf. Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Informe Final, 2003, volume III, Chapter 3.3, p. 293; Available at http://cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/. 249 In the Case of Turluyeva v. Russia it was established that, even though some authorities alleged that the victim was released, the reality is that his family never saw him or had news of him again. Cf. ECHR, Case of Turluyeva v. Russia, no. 63638/09, 20 June 2013, para. 82. 250 The Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances has been informed of various cases in which the families have been advised that the person detained has been released, without anything further being known about them. 51