57 210. In this case, to assess if, regarding the mentioned persons, that risk and knowledge existed, or should have existed by the State, the Court verified that the representatives did not present any additional information on the murders of the four people before the Court. With regard to the murder of Mr. Oscar Brega there is information on his murder in a memorandum dated October 9, 1996 from the Public Prosecutors’ Office to the Special Prosecutors’ Office on Ethnic Matters.216 Similarly, regarding the murders of Messrs. Jorge Castillo and Julio Alberto Morales, there is an undated press article217 included in the evidence referring to the fact that “on October 22nd the Garífunas Jorge Castillo and Julio Alberto Morales were murdered in Triunfo de la Cruz,”218 without any other information. 211. Therefore, this Court does not have sufficient evidentiary elements to determine if the State had, or should have had, knowledge of an actual and imminent situation of danger regarding Messrs. Brega, Castillo, and Morales, and thus cannot issue a ruling on the alleged violation by the State of the right to life, in detriment of these three people. 212. In what refers to the alleged murder of Jesús Álvarez Roche, there is in the case file a document from the CODETT addressed to the Prosecutor of Ethnic Matters dated January 30, 1995, requesting the investigation of “the attempted murder perpetrated against the Auxiliary Mayor of the Triunfo de la Cruz Community, Jesús Álvarez, due to his determined opposition to the illegal sales of land.”219 Additionally, this Court has a statement from Jesús Álvarez made before the Public Prosecutors’ Office on March 16, 1995, from which it can be concluded that they asked him “if it [was] true that due to the opposition stated by him in defense of the lands of El Triunfo de la Cruz he had suffered [an] attempt against his life” and he replied he had suffered “an attempt of murder from which he had serious injuries on his left arm and hip,” on February 4, 1994.220 213. Regarding his death, the Commission indicated in its Merits Report that almost three years after the attack, on May 9, 1997, strangers had fired shots at Jesús Álvarez, who died 22492/93, Judgment of March 28, 2000, paras. 62 and 63, and Osman v. United Kingdom, No. 23452/94, Judgment of October 28, 1998, paras. 115 and 116. This document refers to the fact that Mr. Oscar Brega’s murder occurred on October 8, 1996. The representatives in their brief of pleadings and motions stated it occurred a day later and in an annex to this brief they referred to the date of October 8, 1996. In that annex, the representatives said that “[h]e was the person murdered by strangers at the community entrance when returning from Tela from running his normal errands when he was ambushed by some strangers, who seemed to be waiting for him and shot him.” Moreover, they stated he was buried in Triunfo de la Cruz on October 10 “after the autopsy carried out in San Pedro Sula, without having its results” (evidence file, folio 7743). 216 217 The Commission in its Merits Report stated that the article was from October 28, 1997. The representatives, in the brief of pleadings and motion, stated that Jorge Castillo and Julio Alberto Morales were murdered on October 21, 1998 and in an annex to said brief they mentioned they died on October 21, 1997. This latter document also mentioned that he “received several anonymous threats and suffered an attack the night prior to his death” and that [h]e informed he had filed a complaint before the Police the following day regarding the attack, and upon his return to Tela men were waiting to murder him” and that “they shot at him, the young boy, Julio Alberto Morales, when becoming aware of the danger they were in got nervous and tried to run away; that was when they shot him too and they both died.” (evidence file, folio 7744). 218 219 Brief of January 30, 1995 addressed to the Prosecutor for Ethnic Matters (evidence file, folio 2708). In his statement, Mr. Álvarez indicated that: “he was driving his vehicle toward the community of [T]riunfo de la [C]ruz and later […] he was surprised by two individuals who shot at him and that one of them was pointing at him […] with a shotgun and the other individual who was carrying a 3-57 gun was the one that shot at him, and that they thought he was already dead and that was when he shot his gun, but was not able to hit any of the criminals and that he was able to recognize both individuals […] and that one of them could identify him and it was an individual that goes by the nickname El [C]hino and that he could identify him at any time” (evidence file, folio 327). 220