evidence in the case file reveals that part of “Operation Cacarica” was implemented in geographical places that coincide with several of the objectives of Operation Genesis.533 273. To this should be added the fact that objective No. 6 (Puente América), located several dozen kilometers to the north of the Salaquí River, appears to have been the only one of the eight objectives that the Armed Forces did not attack, considering that, based on military intelligence, it had insufficient resources to attack all the objectives and because this was a lower priority than the others. The Court cannot fail to note that Puente América is located precisely at a point very close to the place where the paramilitaries entered the Cacarica river basin.534 It can even be presumed that Puente América could have constituted one of the places through which the paramilitary groups passed during their incursion into the Cacarica river valley.535 274. It is also worth repeating that there is strong circumstantial evidence and indications that the Army provided “covering fire,” machine-gunning or bombing in a sector situated about two kilometers to the north of Puente América (supra para. 237). This could indicate that the geographical correspondence or overlapping between the two operations did not arise only from the presence of the Armed Forces and of the Self-Defense Forces on the banks of the Salaquí River, but could also have taken place in sectors near Puente América. 275. Fourth, as emphasized by the Eighth Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit in its judgment of August 23, 2012, the two operations took place within the framework of a series of actions designed to achieve a common purpose or objective: to overcome the FARC guerrilla that were present in the area.536 Fifth, as the said Eighth Court mentioned, the testimony of several peasants indicates that they had seen “joint movements by the Army and the selfdefense forces.”537 276. Sixth, as the Eighth Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit indicated in its judgment, it is surprising that “the movement of combatants of the Chocó Bloc from the Los Katios National Park to the Salaquí River occurred at precisely the same moment that this region was the objective of a large-scale military operation.” This court added that “[i]f it is considered that the Army also has the legal mandate to combat the self-defense groups, the advance of those paramilitary units towards the zone of operations is not logical; the proper course of action was precisely the contrary; that is, not to enter the area, to withdraw or to remain inactive in order to avoid confrontations with official troops who were carrying out a offensive in the region.”538 533 Cf. Intelligence report attached to Operations Order No. 004 “Genesis” (evidence file, folios 5516 and 5519); Prosecutor General’s Office, Powerpoint presentation “Operation Cacarica” (evidence file, folio 19253); Prosecutor General’s Office, document “Operation Cacarica” (evidence file, folios 19255 to 19259), and Prosecutor General’s Office, Dossier on the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc, Report No. 260 of June 25, 2012 (evidence file, folio 45156). 534 See, Prosecutor General’s Office, Powerpoint presentation and document “Operation Cacarica” (evidence file, folio 19263 and 19255 to 19259) and Colombian Military Forces, National Army, 17th Brigade Intelligence report attached to Operations Order No. 004 “Genesis” with its appendix (evidence file, folios 5515, 5516 and 5519). 535 According to the prosecutor, the paramilitaries went from the Atrato River towards the Cacarica River. On the way, they passed through Sautatá, and near Loma de Cacaricá, until they reached the mouth of the Perancho River; they then continued by the Cacarica River to Bijao, so that they had to pass by por Puente América. Cf. Prosecutor General’s Office, Powerpoint presentation and document “Operation Cacarica” (evidence file, folios 19263 and 19255 a 19259). 536 Cf. Eighth Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit, file 2009-063, defendant Rito Alejo del Río, judgment of August 23, 2012 (evidence file, folio 14809). 537 Cf. Eighth Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit, file 2009-063, defendant Rito Alejo del Río, judgment of August 23, 2012 (evidence file, folio 14809). 538 Cf. Eighth Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit, file 2009-063, defendant Rito Alejo del Río, judgment of August 23, 2012 (evidence file, folio 14809). 95