84 measures, and the provision of psycho emotional accompaniment that the victim so requires. 269. The Court observes that the Commission and the representatives did not submit these requests at the appropriate procedural opportunity, namely, in the brief containing the application and written brief of pleadings and motions. Consequently, the requests for these measures of reparation are time-barred and the Court will not consider them. D. Indemnization, compensation, costs, and expenses i) Pecuniary damage 270. The Court has developed in its jurisprudence the concept of pecuniary damage and the requisites for which it should be compensated. This Court has established that pecuniary damage supposes “the loss of or detriment to the income of the victims, the expenses incurred as a result of the facts, and the pecuniary consequences that bear a relationship to the facts of the case.”293 271. The Commission requested the Court to, where it deems appropriate, fix in equity an amount of compensation that corresponds to consequential damages and loss of earnings, using its wide faculties on the matter. 272. The representatives indicated that as a direct consequence of the rape of Mrs. Rosendo Cantú, the victim had to abandon involuntarily her two parcels of five hectares each, three head of cattle, and 13 goats. The representatives clarified that the victim was only the proprietor of half of her assets, given that the other half belonged to her husband. They indicated that the commercial value of both the parcels was $120,000.00 M.N. (one hundred and twenty thousand Mexican pesos), of which half belonged to her, namely, $60,000.00 M.N. (sixty thousand Mexican pesos), equivalent to US $4,583.65 (four thousand, five hundred and eighty-three dollars of the United States of America and sixty-five cents). As such, they requested, as a measure of reparation for the loss of the parcels, that “the State […] offers [Mrs. Rosendo Cantú] a parcel with the characteristics of that one which was lost, in the village of Caxitepec […], in order for her to return to her community and return to her heritage where she can then carry out harvesting activities as she did before the rape.” Regarding the heads of cattle, the representatives expressed that each head of cattle had the commercial value of $8,000.00 M.N (eight thousand Mexican pesos) and each goat had the commercial value of $1,000.00 M.N (one thousand Mexican pesos), to which the total value of the cattle was $37,000.00 M.N (thirty-seven thousand Mexican pesos), of which half belonged to her, namely, $18,500.00 M.N (eighteen thousand, five hundred Mexican pesos), equivalent to US $1,413.29 (one thousand, four hundred and thirteen dollars of the United States of America with twenty-nine cents). In addition, they noted that to the prior sums, “medical and transportation costs should be added that […] she had to incur [as a consequence of the rape],” given that she went four times to a private doctor and had to purchase medicine for three months, to which she had to end the treatment due to lack of means. 273. On the other hand, the representatives also stated that, as a direct result of the rape, owing to the stigmatization and discrimination suffered in her community and owing to the well-founded fear of suffering another attack from the soldiers, Mrs. Rosendo Cantú isolated herself from her community and avoided work in her daily chores that entailed cultivation and care of the livestock, and given the situation she was living, had to involuntarily leave the community. The amount that corresponds to the earnings that she did not make since the events took place, amount to $613,552.00 M.N. (six hundred and thirteen thousand, five hundred and fifty-two Mexican pesos), 293 Cf. Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs, Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, para. 43; Case of Chitay Nech, supra note 25, para. 261, and Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas, supra note 25, para. 242.