“with complete certainty” that these statements referred to Luz Mary Portela León, and therefore found that she had been a victim of forced disappearance. 386 259. Based on the foregoing, the Court takes note that the next of kin of at least six disappeared victims (Héctor Jaime Beltrán Fuentes, Bernardo Beltrán Hernández, Irma Franco Pineda, David Suspes Celis, Lucy Amparo Oviedo Bonilla and Luz Mary Portela León) heard or received information during the events that suggested that their loved ones had survived the taking and retaking of the Palace of Justice. 387 260. After November 7, several of the next of kin of the disappeared received information that the persons disappeared were at the North Canton (13th Brigade and Cavalry School) and at the Charry Solano Battalion. 388 261. In addition, some of the information received refers specifically to several of the presumed disappeared victims. In this regard, according to their testimony, the next of kin of David Suspes Celis, Héctor Jaime Beltrán Fuentes, Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera, Gloria Anzola de Lanao, Lucy Amparo Oviedo Bonilla and Irma Franco Pineda received specific information that their loved ones were at the North Canton. 389 In particular, according to the Casa del Florero, except for one man, which is not consistent with his 1986 statement. However, the Court considers that what he said in 2007 does not invalidate what he indicated in 1986, when his memory of what happened was clearer. It also underlines that his 1986 statement is consistent with the other statements cited in this footnote. Cf. Testimony of Carlos Ariel Serrano Sánchez of March 1, 2007, before the Prosecution Service (evidence file, folio 27822). 386 The Superior Court verified that Luz Mary Portela León was not very tall and that, as she was replacing her mother in the kitchen, she used a “tan-colored apron tied at the waist with a cord” and also “a fairly old pair of closefitting jeans.” Cecilia Cabrera, “as head, co-manager and cashier of the cafeteria,” was asked about the testimony of Justice Serrano and said “that, based on the description, […] he must have referred to Luz Mary.” Also, the court considered that the young woman described in that case could not be any of the other disappeared women from the cafeteria because: Ana Rosa Castiblanco Torres “died in the fire”; Gloria Estella Lizarazo Figueroa “served at the selfservice counter and had been identified by the journalist,” and Cristina del Pilar Guarín Cortés “was well-known to Julia Navarrete as she worked as cashier.” Cf. Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of October 24, 2014 (evidence file, folios 38353 and 38354). 387 In addition, the Court notes that, in the case of Ana Rosa Castiblanco Torres, the case file contains statements indicating that information about her had been heard on the radio. One of the statements (that of her sister) is incomplete and only indicates that she heard on the radio that a woman had given birth and was well. However, the statement is not sufficiently clear to infer that this was Ms. Castiblanco Torres. Also, the companion of David Suspes Celis testified that she had heard that a woman had given birth in a cafeteria; however, she indicated that she did not know if this was the cafeteria located in the Palace of Justice. In addition to being imprecise, this information is not consistent with the body identified as that of Ms. Castiblanco Torres, with which a fetus was found, so that she could not have given birth (infra para. 318). Cf. Testimony of María del Carmen Castiblanco of April 10, 1986, before the 27th Itinerant Criminal Court (evidence file, folio 28527); Extract from the testimony of Luz Dary Semper Bedoya of November 21, 1985, in the judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of January 30, 2012 (evidence file, folio 23118), and testimony of Luz Dary Samper Bedoya of December 21, 1985 (evidence file, folio 28245). 388 This refers to the next of kin of Cristina del Pilar Guarín Cortés, Héctor Jaime Beltrán Fuentes, Lucy Amparo Oviedo Bonilla and Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera. Cf. Testimony of José María Guarín Ortiz of November 20, 1986, before the Inspectorate of the Office of the Special Attorney’s assigned to the Military Forces (evidence file, folio 28063); Testimony of René Guarín Cortés of November 13, 1986, before the Inspectorate of the Office of the Special Attorney’s assigned to the Military Forces (evidence file, folio 28080); Testimony of Elsa María Osorio de Acosta of July 26, 2006, before the Prosecution Service (evidence file, folio 28025); expansion of the criminal complaint of Héctor Jaime Beltrán on August 29, 2001 (evidence file, folio 1122); Testimony of Damaris Oviedo of June 14, 2012, before the 71st Notary of the Bogota Circuit (evidence file, folio 27523), and Testimony of Enrique Rodríguez Vera of October 28, 1986, before the Inspectorate of the Office of the Special Attorney’s assigned to the Military Forces (evidence file, folios 27913 and 27914). 389 According to the next of kin of Mr. Suspes Celis, this information was heard on the radio. The next of kin of Messrs. Beltrán Fuentes and Rodríguez Vera stated that they had received information by telephone calls. Ms. Anzola de Lanao’s family received information through a military investigation judge who had obtained the information from a friend, as well as by telephone calls. The next of kin of Ms. Oviedo Bonilla were advised by a neighbor who had been in contact with a Ministry of Defense employee, and through a soldier of the 13th Brigade and another acquaintance, while in the case of Irma Franco Pineda, her brother had spoken to an army officer. Regarding the information received by the next of kin of Ms. Oviedo Bonilla from the Ministry of Defense employee, the Court notes that this 89