this case as well as other persons, has repeatedly condemned the State (infra para. 216), considering that it incurred in a “service-related failure” because: The hasty, unconsidered and irresponsible way in which the Armed Forces quashed the taking of the Palace of Justice, leaving the judge with the depressing sensation of the insignificance of the lives of the victims in the skirmish, whose petitions, supplications, and lamentation were futile. Their captors, whose unjustifiable recklessness, supported by the State’s negligence, led to the tragedy, were annihilated. But, at the same time, almost a hundred people were annihilated, including eleven justices of the Supreme Court and eight officials and employees of this body and of the Council of State. Moreover, ‘to protect the institutions,’ the judicial branch was de-institutionalized, generating appalling and justified fears among its members and a lack of confidence among the population with regard to the institutional strength of the judiciary, in a process of de-legitimization that has still not ended. The precipitate chain of circumstances, some distressing, others scandalous, all of them extremely serious, witnessed by the helpless population, has prevented a conscientious evaluation of the disastrous effects, at all levels, that the atrocious acts that are being tried here produced and continue to produce, the mere description of which horrifies the spirit and saddens the soul of a noble people such as the Colombians, contrary to any concept of civilization. 129 C. The presumed victims in this case 106. Both parties and the Commission agree that Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera, Cristina del Pilar Guarín Cortés, David Suspes Celis, Bernardo Beltrán Hernández, Héctor Jaime Beltrán Fuentes, Gloria Stella Lizarazo Figueroa, Luz Mary Portela León, Norma Constanza Esguerra Forero, Lucy Amparo Oviedo Bonilla, Gloria Anzola de Lanao and Irma Franco Pineda (hereinafter also referred to as the “disappeared victims”), Ana Rosa Castiblanco Torres, Carlos Horacio Urán Rojas, Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci, Eduardo Matson Ospino and Orlando Quijano were in the Palace of Justice when it was taken by the M-19. 130 The Court also notes that it has no evidence to establish exactly where the presumed victims were in the building during the taking and retaking of the Palace of Justice. Even though the cafeteria was on the first floor, in the absence of additional evidence, this is not sufficient to assert that the presumed victims remained there; nevertheless, there is no evidence to affirm that they were on higher floors. 107. However, with the exception of the cases of Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera, Irma Franco Pineda, Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci and Eduardo Matson Ospino, the State contested the conclusions of the Commission and the representatives regarding what happened to each of these victims following the assault on the Palace of Justice. In this section, the Court will establish the facts concerning the situations that have not been contested, and decide the disputes regarding the forced disappearance of the other presumed victims and the alleged detention and torture of Orlando Quijano and José Vicente Rubiano Galvis in the respective chapters on the merits in this Judgment (infra Chapters IX and X). The Court will now establish the facts with regard to: (1) the forced disappearance of Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera and Irma Franco Pineda; (2) general information on the other presumed victims of forced disappearance; (3) the detention and torture of Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci and Eduardo Matson Ospino, and (4) general information on the other presumed victims of detention and torture. C.1) The forced disappearance of Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera and Irma Franco Pineda 129 Judgment of the Council of State of July 24, 1997 (evidence file, folios 536 to 537). See, similarly, Judgment of the Council of State of October 13, 1994 (evidence file, folio 2942 and 2943), and Judgment of the Council of State of October 13, 1994 (evidence file, folio 3234 and 3235). 130 Similarly, the second instance judgment against the Commander of the Cavalry School concluded that Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera, Cristina del Pilar Guarín Cortés, David Suspes Celis, Bernardo Beltrán Hernández, Héctor Jaime Beltrán Fuentes, Gloria Stella Lizarazo, Luz Mary Portela León, Norma Constanza Esguerra, Lucy Amparo Oviedo Bonilla, Gloria Anzola Mora de Lanao, Ana Rosa Castiblanco Torres and Irma Franco Pineda were in the Palace of Justice. Cf. Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of January 30, 2012 (evidence file, folios 22989, 23065, 23082, 23101, 23140, 23141, 23354, 23381, 23404 and 23437). 40