16 66. Based on the preceding paragraphs, the Court finds it has been proved that, between August 1988 and February 1989, Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní received threats against his life and personal integrity related to his leadership during the national mining strikes and that he was even kidnapped on one occasion. These threats exposed him to a grave situation of danger that was public knowledge owing to articles in the media. The kidnapping and death of Saúl Cantoral Huamaní and Consuelo García Santa Cruz 67. The Court finds it has been proved that the alleged victims were kidnapped and then executed during the night of February 13, 1989, after they had met with a person who was going to help Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní obtain a passport to travel to Zimbabwe for a trade union meeting.37 According to the preliminary police investigations, at approximately 11.30 p.m. that evening, the National Police patrol service found the bodies of two persons in the parking lot of the Wiracocha Park. First the body of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní was identified, with injuries caused by six bullets, and then the body of Consuelo García-Santa Cruz.38 A piece of cardboard bearing the words “perro soplón, vendido, viva la huelga minera, viva el PCP” [informer, traitor, long live the mining strike, long live the PCP] and a drawing of the hammer and sickle were found near Mr. Cantoral-Huamaní’s body.39 68. Regarding what happened in the moments before the death of the alleged victims, the Court notes that both the Commission and the representatives maintain that they were subjected to physical and psychological abuse before being deprived of their life. 69. The Court observes that in the case of Consuelo García-Santa Cruz, the police investigations concluded that her body “does not show any bullet wound, but there are trauma injuries to the head, possibly caused by the tire of a moving vehicle, which killed her” (infra para. 127).40 Until 2006, the official version of the facts was that her death had been caused by being run over by a vehicle; moreover, according to the police report, “no ballistic testing was done on the deceased “NN” [no name], subsequently identified as Consuelo GARCIA-SANTA CRUZ, as she did not present any wounds that merited a ballistics report.”41 70. The State has acknowledged that the protocols of the autopsies conducted immediately after the death of the alleged victims were mislaid. The Court finds that, in 2006, according to the evidence submitted by the State, a new autopsy was performed by the Forensic Medicine Institute of the Attorney General’s Office. With regard to Saúl Cantoral Huamaní, the new autopsy found, inter alia, five bullet wounds, four in the skull 37 Cf. Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, supra para. 48, Volume VII, Section 2.19, “The murders committed by the paramilitary group calling itself the Rodrigo Franco commando (1985-1990)” (file of appendixes to the application, Volume I, appendix 2, page 8); note of the State No. 7-5-M/037 of February 4, 1994 (file of appendixes to the application, Volume II, appendix 1.5, page 223); and Report No. 11–D4-DINCOTE, issued by the National Counter-terrorism Directorate on January 2, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief answering the application, appendix 1, pages 753-754. 38 Cf. Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, supra para. 48, Volume VII, Section 2.19, “The murders committed by the paramilitary group calling itself the Rodrigo Franco commando (1985-1990)” (file of appendixes to the application, Volume I, appendix 2, page 8); note of the State No. 7-5-M/037 of February 4, 1994 (file of appendixes to the application, Volume II, appendix 1.5, page 223); and Report No. 11–D4-DINCOTE, issued by the National Counter-terrorism Directorate on January 2, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief answering the application, appendix 1, pages 753-754. 39 Cf. note of the State No. 7-5-M/037 of February 4, 1994 (file of appendixes to the application, Volume II, appendix 1.5, page 223); and Report No. 11–D4-DINCOTE, issued by the National Counter-terrorism Directorate on January 2, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief answering the application, appendix 1, pages 747). 40 Cf. Report No. 11–D4-DINCOTE, issued by the National Counter-terrorism Directorate on January 2, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief answering the application, appendix 1, pages 756). 41 Cf. Report No. 11–D4-DINCOTE, issued by the National Counter-terrorism Directorate on January 2, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief answering the application, appendix 1, pages 744).