and weigh the documentary evidence submitted by the parties on various occasions during the proceedings, as well as the statements of the victims and the expert witness reports rendered via affidavit and during the public hearing before the Court, along with the evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case that was requested by the Tribunal (supra paras. 10 and 13). In doing so, the Court will follow the rules of sound judgment, within the applicable legal framework.17 A. Documentary, testimonial, and expert evidence. 39. The Court received various documents presented as evidence by the InterAmerican Commission, the representative, and the State along with their principal briefs (supra paras. 1, 5, and 6). Likewise, the Court received the testimony given before notaries public (affidavits) by the following alleged victims, witnesses, and expert witnesses18: a) Fabiola Valeria Torres and Marcos Alejandro Torres Millacura. Alleged victims, siblings of Iván Eladio Torres Millacura. Testimony offered by the representatives. They addressed the composition of the family prior to October 2, 2003, their brother’s activity at the moment of his alleged forced disappearance, and his relationship with the police of the Province of Chubut prior to October 2, 2003; the circumstances of his alleged enforced disappearance on October 2, 2003; the various attempts made by them to discover his whereabouts in the period immediately following his alleged disappearance; the alleged responses to and attitude toward these attempts on the part of the authorities; the alleged lack of State willingness to investigate the facts and the consequences of all these situations; the alleged lack of State willingness to provide information on the judicial proceedings initiated as a consequence of the alleged enforced disappearance of Iván Eladio Torres Millacura; the supposed obstacles faced by the family since his disappearance; and the consequences for their personal and family life after October 2, 2003. b) Miguel Ángel Sánchez. Witness. Testimony offered by the representatives. Addressed the circumstances in which he met Iván Eladio Torres Millacura and the time and place in which he stayed with him; the circumstances of the alleged enforced disappearance; and the attempts made to speak with Mrs. María Leontina Millacura Llaipén, the mother of Iván Eladio Torres Millacura. c) Tamara Bolívar. Friend of Iván Eladio Torres Millacura. Witness. Testimony offered by the representatives. Addressed the circumstances under which she met Mr. Torres Millacura and the friendship that she maintained with him; the relationship that Iván Eladio Torres and his friends maintained with the police of the Province of Chubut; the circumstances of his alleged enforced disappearance on October 2, 2003; her various attempts to discover his whereabouts in the period immediately following his alleged disappearance; the alleged responses to and attitude toward these attempts on the part of the authorities; the alleged lack of State willingness to investigate the facts and the consequences of all these situations; and the alleged lack of State willingness to provide information on the Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 5, 2011 Series C No. 228, para. 36. 17 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) V. Guatemala, supra note 17, para. 75; Case of Vera Vera et al. V. Ecuador, supra note 17, para. 19, and Case of Mejía Idrovo V. Ecuador, supra note 17, para. 36. 18 The representatives did not present the Tribunal with the sworn statements given before notaries public (affidavit) by Gerardo Colín and Patricio Oliva, offered by them in the brief of pleadings and motions, ordered through an Order of the President of the Tribunal dated April 29, 2011 (supra para. **). 12