recognized by his sister and other relatives of the disappeared victims, exiting on November 7, is Bernardo Beltrán Hernández. 424 279. Gloria Stella Lizarazo Figueroa was identified in a photograph and in a video by her husband and in the latter also by Cecilia Cabrera, Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera’s wife, who also identified her in two other videos during procedures carried out in 2007. 425 Furthermore, her sister and an acquaintance believed that they recognized her in a video in 1986 without being completely certain. 426 The first instance courts that have heard this case have accorded probative value to the said identifications and have used them to prove that Ms. Lizarazo Figueroa left the Palace of Justice alive. 427 To the contrary, in its two second instance decisions, the Superior Court doubted the credibility of the testimony of her husband and underlined the lack of certainty in the identifications. 428 Also, in the proceedings against the Commander of the Cavalry School, the court underlined the fact that the person in the image was not wearing the clothes “worn by [Gloria Estella] when working behind the self-service counter.” 429 424 Regarding the identifications made by Sandra Beltrán, René Guarín Cortés and Cecilia Cabrera, the Chamber of the Superior Court “acknowledge[d] that they were extremely persuasive, because they knew the person enough to see from the images that his features and the shape of his body as a whole appeared in the segments that were presented to them, even though they were unable to give a technical description of why they stated that it was him.” The Chamber concluded, “based on the assessment of the testimony and the corroboration of the pictorial documentary evidence, that Bernardo Beltrán Hernández is the person that his next of kin identified leaving the Palace alive in the custody of the Army, and as there has been no news of him since then, [it] declared him forcibly disappeared.” Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of October 24, 2014 (evidence file, folios 38335 and 38342). 425 Gloria Stella Lizarazo was identified in a photograph by her husband; in the video obtained during the inspection of the residence of the Commander of the Cavalry School by her husband and by Cecilia Cabrera; in the video handed over by Ana María Bidegain and in the video obtained during the inspection of in the Attorney General’s office both by Cecilia Cabrera. In addition, Ms. Lizarazo Figueroa’s husband indicated that he had recognized her previously in a video of Noticias Uno. Cf. Testimony of Luis Carlos Ospina Arias of December 10, 2007, before the Prosecution Service (evidence file, folios 27936 to 27941), and Testimony of Cecilia Cabrera of August 16, 2007, before the Prosecution Service (evidence file, folios 1058 to 1060). 426 The deponents were shown three TVE videos. They identified Gloria Stella Lizarazo Figueroa in one of the videos indicating that “they could not be sure [that it was her], but it looked very like her.” The judge “record[ed that, in the image,] even though it is clear, it is not possible to distinguish well-defined features of the people and that the person to whom the witnesses referred appears in the [image] carried on the shoulders of a soldier, and thus her face cannot be seen.” Cf. Procedure of identification on some video-cassettes of April 11, 1986 (evidence file, folio 30981). See also, affidavit made on November 6, 2013, by Deyamira Lizarazo (evidence file, folio 35711). 427 Cf. Judgment of the Third Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit of June 9, 2010 (evidence file, folios 24007 and 24008); Judgment of the 51st Criminal Court of the Bogota Circuit of April 28, 2011 (evidence file, folios 24507 and 24568), and Judgment of the 51st Criminal Court of the Bogota Circuit of December 15, 2011 (evidence file, folios 20961 to 20964). 428 In this regard, in the proceedings against the Commander of the Cavalry School, it indicated that the deponent identified several of the cafeteria employees when years before he had indicated that he only knew “Rosa and Jimmy.” In addition, it noted that the parents of Carlos Augusto Rodríguez Vera had shown the deponent the video previously. In addition, it indicated that when he identified Ms. Lizarazo Figueroa “no physical features that distinguished her from other individuals could be noted,” and that he had not been questioned in this regard. Cf. Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of January 30, 2012 (evidence file, folios 23108 to 23110). In the proceedings against the Commander of the 13th Brigade, the Superior Court underlined the same conclusions as the Chamber in the other trial, as well as the contradictions in the identifications and their lack of certainty. Cf. Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of October 24, 2014 (evidence file, folios 38348 and 38349). 429 On this point, in the proceedings against the Commander of the 13th Brigade, although recognizing that she might have changed her clothes, the Superior Court considered that, in this case, no reference had been made “to clothes that would be an indicator, nor is there a description of features that can be verified, or any other means of developing convincing indications.” Cf. Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of October 24, 2014 (evidence file, folios 38348 and 38349). In addition, both chambers of the Superior Court rejected the identification made by Cecilia Cabrera, mainly because the person identified is the same one regarding whom her sister and a friend were unsure. Cf. Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of January 30, 2012 (evidence file, folios 23110 and 23111), and Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of October 24, 2014 (evidence file, folio 38348). 98