106 (iv) the expenses incurred in order to provide meals during his detention in the Castro-Castro, Huacariz, and El Milagro Prisons, which were partly covered covered by his severance pay, and by the lease of some family lands and by his siblings contributions, amount to US $ 5,495 (five thousand four hundred and ninety-five U.S. dollars); (v) the traveling expenses incurred by his siblings to visit him at the Cajamarca and Trujillo Prisons amount to US $ 2,295 (two thousand two hundred and ninety-five U.S. dollars); (vi) the expenses incurred by the alleged victim’s siblings to buy hin medicines amount to US $ 1,061 (one thousand and sixty-one U.S. dollars); (vii) attorneys’ fees covering a 13-year period during which the first court trial convicted and sentenced him to serve twenty years in prison, and further covering the current judicial proceedings currently being held as a consequence of the invalidity of the former, which in the aggregate amount to US $ 1,053 (one thousand and fifty-three U.S. dollars;) and (viii) expenses incurred to send mail and faxes abroad, amounting to US $ 1,932 (one thousand nine hundred and thirty-two U.S. dollars). Arguments of the State 258. The State has not filed any arguments regarding pecuniary damage. Considerations of the Court 259. The Court shall determine the pecuniary damage arising from the loss of income suffered by the victims and the expenses incurred by their next of kin as a consequence of the events occurred,192 and shall fix a compensation amount to remedy the financial consequences of the violations occurred. For that purpose, the Court shall take into consideration the partial acknowledgement of responsibility made by the State and the evidence gathered in the instant case, as well as its prior decisions and the arguments filed by the Commission and by the representatives. a) Loss of income 260. The Court considers proven that Wilson García-Asto was studying Systems Engineering by the time he was detained, and for that reason he could not complete his studies (supra para. 97(10).) Furthermore, the Court considers proven that Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas was an economist who was retired at the moment of his detention, and had planned to carry on activities related to rendering advisory services and conducting research projects (supra para. 97(69)). 192 Cf. Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”, supra note 2, para. 265; Case of Raxcacó-Reyes, supra note 10, para. 129; and Case of Gutiérrez-Soler, supra note 6, para. 74.