January 14, 2011, the representatives forwarded a communication in which they referred to “the recent death of Néstor Caudi Barrios” and, subsequently, on June 6, 2011, they clarified that he had been the victim of an attempt on his life, but was still alive.18 Lastly, on May 30, 2011, the Commission informed the Court that, on May 28, 2011, Juan José Barrios had been deprived of his life, forwarded two newspaper articles in this regard, and asked the Court to analyze this supervening fact. 20. The Court finds that, in principle, the facts reported following the submission of the case are related to the purpose of the case; in other words, the alleged threats, attacks, detentions, and deprivation of life of members of the Barrios family (supra para. 3). Consequently, the Court admits as evidence of supervening facts the documents provided by the Commission that have not been contested by the parties, in the terms of Article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure. 21. Additionally, during the public hearing, the State handed over statistical information on the number of police agents involved and accused of crimes presumably committed in exercise of their functions, and sentenced and convicted with a final judgment. For their part, the representatives handed over copies of judicial case files obtained after presentation of the pleadings and motions brief.19 The copies of these documents were forwarded to the other parties at that time and were not contested by them; thus the Court admits these documents under Article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure. 22. Lastly, the parties submitted documents together with their final written arguments and observations, in response to the requests made by the Court’s judges during the public hearing. The representatives also submitted receipts for costs and expenses incurred after the presentation of the pleadings and motions brief (infra para. 380). The Commission forwarded extracts from a report of the Office of the Venezuelan Ombudsman. For its part, the State forwarded updated documentation on the status of the domestic investigations, reports from the Public Prosecution Service and the Ombudsman's Office, a document related to the alleged situation of displacement of the members of the Barrios family, and the minutes of a special hearing held on July 27, 2011, on the measures of protection ordered in the domestic sphere. While the representatives and the Commission forwarded the documents related to the questions raised by the Court promptly, the State sent them on August 30, 2011; in other words, nine days after the non-extendible time frame established in Article 28(1) of the Rules of Procedure had expired. Nevertheless, the Court recalls that the updated information on the domestic proceedings and the presumed displacement of the alleged victims was provided by the State in response to a specific request for helpful evidence made by the Court during the public hearing. Consequently, the Court decides to admit them in application of Article 58(b) of the Rules of Procedure, and will assess the relevant parts of them, taking into consideration the body of evidence, the observations of the parties, and the rules of sound judicial discretion. C. Admission of the statements of the alleged victims and the testimonial and expert evidence 23. Regarding the statements of the alleged victims and the witness, and the expert opinions provided during the public hearing and by affidavit, the Court finds them pertinent insofar as they comply with the purpose defined by the President in the order requiring them (supra para. 7). They will be assessed in the corresponding chapter, together with the 18 Brief of the representatives of June 6, 2011 (merits file, tome III, folios 772 and 773). 19 Acknowledgment of receipt of documents of June 30, 2011. 13