103. The Court notes, first, that, when Mr. Ruiz Fuentes was found dead he had two wounds caused by firearm bullets. It is pertinent to highlight the autopsy performed in the early morning hours of November 15, 2005, which indicated that the first bullet wound had an entry orifice in the right eye with “a tattooed area around it.”124 The Court notes that this first bullet that hit Mr. Ruiz Fuentes was fired from a short distance and this is due precisely to the presence of a tattooed area around the entry orifice. It is difficult to reconcile this short distance (no more than 15 centimeters 125) with the State’s version that Mr. Ruiz Fuentes died due to an armed confrontation if either the first version of the State (confrontation with unknown persons) or the second version (confrontation with members of the State’s law enforcement agencies) is accepted.126 The Court also underscores the statement by Mr. Ruiz Fuentes’ sister who indicated that when she went to pray at the place where her brother died, one of the neighbors told her that: “He saw a patrol vehicle that stopped and that they let a man get out of it and told him ‘get going and if you’re lucky, you will escape.’ Then Hugo began to walk and turned round to look. But that street has a U shape and when he reached the bend, there were other police officers, another patrol vehicle, and they began to fire at him.”127 104. The Court also notes that shortly after the shots were fired and Mr. Ruiz Fuentes died, 12 members of the PNC Anti-kidnapping Command led by police superintendent V.S.D. arrived on the scene.128 The Court observes that if Mr. Ruiz Fuentes’ death had resulted from a confrontation with private individuals it would have been, at the very least, improbable that members of the command charged with his recapture were present at the crime scene only a few minutes after his death. 105. This is in addition to the fact that, according to the body of evidence, the crime scene was altered. This was corroborated by the expert appraisal made by expert witness Guillermo Carranza who, in his expert report and also during the public hearing, indicated that “the sweater and shirt were pulled upwards and the jeans were pulled downwards, due to [the body] being dragged,” and this indicated that the body of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes “was moved from its original position.”129 During the public hearing held before this Court, expert witness Guillermo Carranza also stressed that the act of taking the soot out of the entry orifice in the right eye “changed the shot distance” because it lengthened it from a short-distance shot to “a medium- to long-distance shot.”130 The Court also points out the observation Cf. Autopsy performed by Dr. Edgar Ricardo Arriola Barrios, Departmental Forensic Physician of the Cuilapa Judiciary, Santa Rosa, on November 15, 2005 (evidence file, folio 231). See also, Expert report of Dr. Guillermo Austreberto Carranza Izquierdo of June 3, 2008 (evidence file, folio 243). 125 Cf. Expert report of Dr. Guillermo Austreberto Carranza Izquierdo of June 3, 2008 (evidence file, folio 243). See also, Expert opinion provided by Guillermo Austreberto Carranza Izquierdo during the public hearing before the Inter-American Court on March 5, 2019. 126 In his expert report of June 3, 2008, expert witness Guillermo Carranza concluded: “Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes received the first and the mortal wound caused by a firearm bullet in the internal angle of the upper eyelid of his right eye with exit in the left occipital area of the cranium, and it was fired at short distance. […] The position of the perpetrator in relation to the victim was on foot, face-to-face, pointing the barrel of the gun at a 90 degree angle, at a distance of 15 centimeters from the victim, which is why the victim blinked as a reflex and the wound is on the eyelid, with the findings of the residue of the shot consisting in smokiness and tattooing around the wound.” Cf. Expert opinion provided by Guillermo Austreberto Carranza Izquierdo during the public hearing before the Inter-American Court on March 5, 2019. 127 Cf. Affidavit made by the sister of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes, on February 28, 2019 (evidence file, folio 8480). 128 According to the statement made by the officer of the National Civil Police, Meregildo Cermeño Cabrera, “at around 8 p.m., he was having dinner, when he heard several shots.” “Several minutes” later Mr. Cermeño went to the scene of the incident, where he “saw that there were several men in plain clothes, with balaclava helmets, carrying firearms, handguns and rifles, who were under the command of police superintendent V.S.D.” Cf. Statement of Meregildo Cermeño Cabrera before the Public Prosecution Service on November 7, 2007 (evidence file, folios 316 and 317). See also, Report of the State of Guatemala to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in case 12,650 Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes, dated October 27, 2016 (evidence file, folio 2568) which indicates that “according to witnesses, V.S.D., and the PNC Director General at the time, E.S.V., were seen at the scene of the crime,” and Police record of November 14, 2005, Procedure No. 1709-2005 (evidence file, folio 233). 129 Cf. Expert report of Dr. Guillermo Austreberto Carranza Izquierdo of June 3, 2008 (evidence file, folios 242 and 243). See also, Expert opinion provided by Guillermo Austreberto Carranza Izquierdo during the public hearing before the InterAmerican Court on March 5, 2019. 130 Cf. Expert opinion provided by Guillermo Austreberto Carranza Izquierdo during the public hearing before the Inter124 26