North Canton) and tortured.” It also took in account, when analyzing the contextual situation relating to the disappearance of Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera and Irma Franco Pineda, that “[o]ther individuals [such as José Vicente Rubiano Galvis], retained in different actions that took place at the same time as the taking of the Palace or following this, were taken to the Cavalry School.” 592 B.1.4) The warnings or threats so that the presumed victims would not testify about what happened 389. The Court notes that three of the presumed victims who were allegedly detained and tortured or ill-treated have stated that they were warned or threatened not to report what had happened to them. In particular, the Court underlines that both Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci and Eduardo Matson Ospino, regarding whom the State has acknowledged the acts perpetrated against them, have testified that when they were released, the soldiers insisted that “nothing had happened,” that they had been “retained” not “detained” (supra para. 140). Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci also indicated that, during a meeting in the office of the Regional Attorney General, he had recommended to them that they “should not recount everything [they] knew, because [their] life and that of [their] families was in danger.” 593 Subsequently, Ms. Santodomingo Albericci testified that she had received threats and, in 2007, she requested the Inter-American Commission to grant precautionary measures, and the Commission asked the State to provide information in this regard. 594 In addition, the person who was with Orlando Quijano, and who testified before the Truth Commission on condition that his identity was not revealed, indicated that, before leaving the 13th Brigade, “a soldier warned him that it was better ‘that he knew nothing and had seen nothing.’” 595 390. The Court also takes note that José Vicente Rubiano Galvis has testified on different occasions that he did not denounce what had happened or file a claim against the State previously because “they threatened [him], the Army personnel, that if [he] sued them for torturing him, they would kill [him] and [his] family.” 596 In this regard, the Court notes that, in addition to the information concerning the request for precautionary measures by Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci, it only has the statements of the victims with regard to the presumed threats or warnings. However, it takes note that the statements of three of the four presumed victims of detention and torture are consistent in indicating that that they were threatened or warned not to say what had happened. 592 Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of January 30, 2012 (evidence file, folios 23319 to 23320 and 23323). 593 Testimony provided by Yolanda Santodomingo before the Prosecution Service on August 1, 2006 (evidence file, folio 1025). 594 Cf. Communication of the Inter-American Commission of May 8, 2007 (evidence file, folio 16249). The State also advised in its final written arguments that, at the request of Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci following the public hearing in this case, the State had “ordered preventive measures of protection for her and her family; in particular, security patrols around her residence, and had given her the emergency telephone numbers of the National Police so that she could communicate with them in case of emergency.” It also indicated that, in 2010, a risk assessment had been made of Ms. Santodomingo Albericci and the result had been that she was in a situation of ordinary risk. Cf. Final written arguments of the State (merits file, folio 4300). 595 Report of the Truth Commission (evidence file, folio 182). 596 Cf. Testimony of José Vicente Rubiano Galvis of May 15, 2007, before the Prosecution Service (evidence file, folio 1284). See also, Affidavit made by José Vicente Rubiano Galvis on November 5, 2013 (evidence file, folio 35621), and Testimony of José Vicente Rubiano Galvis of June 2, 2009, before the 51st Criminal Court of the Bogota Circuit (evidence file, folios 14657 and 14675). He also testified that a month after the events occurred, in the Primavera district of Bogota, where his mother lived, he had been intercepted by military intelligence agents in a vehicle, who told him not to denounce the facts because they would kill him. Cf. Testimony of José Vicente Rubiano Galvis of May 15, 2007, before the Prosecution Service (evidence file, folio 1286), and Testimony of José Vicente Rubiano Galvis of June 2, 2009, before the 51st Criminal Court of the Bogota Circuit (evidence file, folio 14657). 135