[…] In keeping with Article 321 of the Criminal Procedural Code, therefore, the trial [of Zamudio Aliaga] should be declared suspended until he has been taken in and brought before the Chamber, at which time, with the guarantees of due process, he should face the charges brought by the Prosecutor General and the claims of the plaintiffs, in the presence of all parties, and a verdict should be handed down.397 312. This version of the facts can also be drawn from the final decision made in the domestic jurisdiction in the framework of the investigations, handed down by the Transitory Criminal Law Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice when it ruled on motions to vacate, lodged against the verdict of the Third Special Criminal Chamber (supra paras. 233 and 234), which said the following about the death of Cruz Sánchez: The military operation unfolded very quickly, it was precise and effective, and as has been established, guidelines were set in place for cases of injured and captured MRTA members. […] [… I]t can therefore be asserted only that the extrajudicial execution, as held by the trial court, and which was not included in the appeal, was an isolated crime and not part of the operation or the plans developed by higher-ranking authorities.398 E) Examination of the State’s international responsibility for the death of Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez based on the evidence 313. The Court has examined the evidence in the case file and the particular circumstances surrounding the facts of Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez’ death and finds that at the time he died, he was in the custody of the State. 314. Statements by members of the State security forces Robles Reynoso and Torres Arteaga, corroborated by the story of former hostage Ogura, have convinced this Court that Cruz Sánchez was captured alive in the yard of house No. 1, that he was bound and neutralized, that he was not bearing arms, and that he was turned over to a member of the armed forces who took him back inside the residence. Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez was later found dead. According to the report of the forensic anthropologists, he had been immobilized at the time of death (supra para. 178). None of the commandos who made statements before the military courts acknowledged having shot or killed him. What happened between the time he was detained and the time he died has not yet been fully elucidated. 315. The State argued before this Court that Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez was carrying a grenade at the time of his death. Peruvian judicial authorities themselves, however, dismiss this hypothesis, as the Third Special Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima cautioned that there were “questions as to whether the MRTA member known as ‘Tito’ had a grenade on his person, considering that he had been detained and his hands were bound behind his back; moreover, the unfolding of the event […] would suggest that in view of the impact force of the bullet, if he had been holding a grenade, it would not have remained in his hand.”399 The Court does not see how it could be possible, after he had been captured and as he was being escorted 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). 397 Ruling by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court on an appeal to vacate judgment, 35212012 July 24, 2013 (evidence file, volume XXI, helpful evidence, folio 14721). 398 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, folio 13614). 399