Barrios, also alleged victims in this case.11 In addition, the Court adopted other orders for provisional measures on February 4 and November 25, 2010, and February 21, 2011. The provisional measures ordered by the Court remain in force at the date of this judgment. V EVIDENCE 12. Based on the provisions of Articles 46, 47, 50, 57 and 58 of the Rules of Procedure, as well as on its case law concerning evidence and its assessment, the Court will examine and assess the documentary evidence submitted by the parties on different procedural occasions, as well as the statements of the victims and the testimony and the expert opinions provided by affidavit and during public hearing before the Court, together with the helpful evidence that was requested by the Court (supra para. 9). To this end, the Court will observe the principles of sound judicial discretion, within the corresponding legal framework.12 A. Documentary, testimonial and expert evidence 13. The Court received various documents presented as evidence by the Inter-American Commission, the representatives and the State, together with their main briefs (supra paras. 1, 4 and 5). In addition, the Court received affidavits from the following alleged victims and expert witnesses:13 1) Víctor Daniel Cabrera Barrios, alleged victim proposed by the representatives, who testified on the alleged violations of which he had been the victim and those supposedly committed against his family, and the impact that the facts had had on his mother Eloisa Barrios, personally, and on her family life and her life project; 2) Maritza Barrios, alleged victim proposed by the representatives, who testified on the alleged circumstances surrounding the death of her brothers, her nephews and her sons, as well as on the alleged violations of which she was a victim and those allegedly committed against the rest of her family; the actions taken to obtain justice and the response of the State authorities; the supposed suffering that the alleged violations and their impunity had caused her family and, in particular, the alleged impact that the murder of her next of kin and the constant threats had caused to her personally, her family life and her life project; 3) Elbira Barrios, alleged victim proposed by the representatives, who testified on the alleged circumstances surrounding the death of her brothers, her nephews and her son Oscar José Barrios, as well as on the alleged violations of which she was a victim and those supposedly committed against her family; the actions taken to obtain justice and the response of the State authorities; the supposed suffering that 11 In addition, the provisional measures included Yelitza Lugo Pelaes, who the Commission had not indicated as an alleged victim in the instant case. 12 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 8, 2001. Series C No. 37, para. 76, and Case of Barbani Duarte et al. v. Uruguay. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of October 13, 2011. Series C. No. 234, para. 16. 13 In their brief of June 6, 2011, the representatives informed the Court that they would desist from submitting the testimony of Justina Barrios, Inés Josefina Barrios, Darelbis Carolina Barrios, Jorge Antonio Barrios Ortuño, Gustavo Ravelo, Jesús Ravelo, Dalila Ordalyz Ortuño and Junclis Esmil Rangel Terán (merits file, tome III, folio 775). 9