himself said, he observed it when he was preparing to climb down the metal ladder placed on the balcony, and this ladder, as we have seen in the photographs, and as is clear from the statements of the commandos who were members of the strike force responsible for rescuing the Japanese hostages from this room, was resting against the metal railing of the balcony, so he would not have been able to see well enough into the room because the width of the wall between the door to the room and the far end of the balcony railing made it impossible, and moreover, the hostages were being evacuated one by one as a safety measure, so if as the witness himself said, he was the next-to-last hostage, and it is clear in the case file that the final hostage was hurrying to climb down but returned to the room for his medications, it means that witness Ogura was no longer on the scene, that is, he was climbing down the ladder; all this, without considering the terms of the oral questioning (the representative of the public prosecutor says that the military operation was a success and that no extrajudicial execution was committed by the commandos) or the final ruling by the military courts (saying that these two subversives died in combat).419 338. The description provided in this verdict concerning the deaths of these members of the MRTA was upheld by the Transitory Criminal Law Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice in a ruling on July 24, 2013 on the motions to vacate: [C]oncerning the deaths of victims Peceros Pedraza and Meléndez Cueva, […] Hidetaka Ogura stated that after the commandos entered room ‘I’—that was where the hostages were, including the judges; eleven Japanese hostages were in the room next door, room ‘H’, including Ogura. When he turned to look toward the main door to room ‘I’, he observed that two MRTA members—one of them was Cynthia—were surrounded by tall soldiers; that before he went down the ladder, he heard Cynthia shouting something like: ‘Don’t kill him’ or ‘Don’t kill me’. [Other hostages] commented that they could see nothing because of all the smoke caused by the shooting and by the bombs exploding [… and] similar statements were made by the commandos from delta squad eight […]. [N]ot only did three commandos (not two, as the verdict under appeal states) admit that they had shot at the complainant terrorists in an act of combat, but all the commandos dispute the description of the scene offered by Hidetaka Ogura. […] [S]imilarly, the forensic evidence fails to corroborate the charges and the description given by Hidetaka Ogura. […] [I]n the instant case, the statement by Hidetaka Ogura concerning victims Meléndez Cueva and Peceros Pedraza is not plausible and has not been corroborated on any point. This means it cannot be held as proven or conclusive evidence, nor can it be considered consequential. The evidence for the defense undermined the plausibility of his story. At the same time, forensic evidence points to crossfire in combat, not to a summary execution of overpowered, unarmed MRTA guerrillas. […] In short, it has been proven that victims Meléndez Cueva and Peceros Pedraza were not arbitrarily executed, and they died in an act of combat.420 F) Assessment of the State’s international responsibility for the deaths of Herma Luz Meléndez Cueva y Víctor Salomón Peceros Pedraza based on the evidence Judgment by the Third Special Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima, October 15, 2012 (evidence file, volume XX, annexed to the representatives’ observations on the State’s preliminary objections, folios 13177 to 13692). 419 Ruling by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court on an appeal to vacate judgment, 35212012, July 24, 2013 (evidence file, volume XXI, further helpful evidence, folios 14666 to 14723). 420