Inagan and Jiménez respectively.80The security patrol under the command of Sergeant Jiménez was stationed next to the road in a “thicket” and was comprised of Leonardo Prieto Cáceres, Wilson Días Durán, José Isabel Benavides Liñán, Omar Duarte Guerra, Ariel Méndez Quirife and Luis Villamizar Anaya. 81 68. There is no dispute that the members of said roadblock firing on Gustavo Giraldo Villamizar, who lost his life due to “a massive destruction of the brain and wounds to abdominal organs” and which “together or separately are essentially fatal.” 82 Likewise, there is no controversy that according to the diligence of the body collection a “shell was found close to the body of the deceased” as well a bag, containing: “two fragmentation grenades, 15 9mm caliber bullets with their respective plastic case, and two pamphlets indicative of the Subversive Group FARC-EP.” 83 There is no controversy about the contents of the autopsy protocol with regards to 4 wounds caused by firearms and the respective exit wounds: i) in the parietal region and part of the frontal region; ii) “presenting multiple bone fragments and irregular borders in the occipital region…”; iii) “left pectoral region of the thorax”; and iv) the “apex of the dorsal of the hand…” According to the autopsy protocol, none of the shots left traces or burns and they had an “inferior-superior” and “posterior-anterior” trajectory. 84 69. The version of events conveyed by the military present in the operation states that Mr. Giraldo Villamizar was driving a motorcycle in the direction of the military roadblock and, when he saw it, he abrutptly turned around. At that time, Sergeant Urbano had given the order to stop on behalf of the National Army and, without stopping, Mr. Giraldo Villamizar had continued on his way back. At that time, Sergeant Urbano would have signaled Sergeant Jiménez, who was at the security patrol, warning him that the motorcycle was returning to the other side of the roadblock. The security patrol under the command of Sergeant Jiménez left the “thicket” to encounter Mr. Villamizar, and had given the order “stop National Army.” Mr. Giraldo Villamizar is said to have disobeyed this order, produced a gun and shot at members of the patrol, 80 Annex 19. Diligence rendered by SLV. Mr. Leonardo Prieto Cáceres before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 24, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010; Annex. 20. Diligence rendered by Regular soldier Mr. Días Durán Wilson before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 24, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010; Annex. 22. Diligence rendered by First Sergeant Mr. José Virgilio Jiménez Mahecha before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 24, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010; Annex 18. Diligence rendered by Second Sergeant Mr. Gustavo Urbano Mejía before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 24, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010; Annex 26. Diligence rendered by First Sergeant Mr. José Isabel Benavides Lina before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 26, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010; Annex. 24. Diligence rendered by SLV. Mr. Reymund Piñeres before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 26, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on October 29, 2010; Annex. 25. Diligence rendered by Second Sergeant Mr. Inagan Guaspud before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, 20 January, 1997. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010; Annex. 21. Diligence rendered by SLV. Mr. Ariel Méndez Quirife before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 24, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010; Annex. 28. Diligence rendered by regular Soldier Nelson Alfredo Monroy de León before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, August 30, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. 81Annex. 22. Diligence rendered by First Sergeant José Virgilio Jiménez Mahecha León before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, August 30, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. 82Annex. 29. National institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, Autopsy Protocol No. 040-96-ILS. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. 83Annex. 30. Unidad Investigativa de Policía Judicial Saravena, Arauca, Photographic album, October 28, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. 84According to the autopsy protocol: i) the first, with an entrance orifice 11cm of the vertex and 8cm from the posterior line in the right retroauricular region of the head and an exit orifice that compromises the entire parietal region and part of the front; ii) the second, with an entrance orifice 23cm of the vertex and 5cm of the posterior median line of the right lateral region of the neck and exit orifice presenting multiple bone fragments and irregular borders in the lower left occipital region of the head, 10cm from the vertex and 6cm from the posterior median line; iii) the third, 55cm from the vertex and 2.5cm from the posterior median line in the left paravertebral region of the back and exit orifice 53cm from the vertex and 11 cm from the anterior line in the left pectoral region of the thorax; iv) the fourth, with an exit orifice 99cm from the vertex in the third proximal of the second phalanx of the left hand second finger, dorsal side, and exit orifice 90cm from the apex of the dorsal side of the hand on the edge between the metacarpal of the first and second finger. Annex. 29. National institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, Autopsy Protocol No. 040-96-ILS. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010