21 V EVIDENCE 51. Based on that established in Articles 46, 47, and 50 of the Court Rules of Procedure, as well as in its jurisprudence on evidence and its assessment,45 the Court will examine and evaluate the documental evidentiary elements submitted by the parties in the various procedural opportunities, as well as the declarations of the alleged victims, the testimonies, the expert reports rendered by sworn statement before a public notary and in the public hearing before the Court. Accordingly, the Court will adhere to the principles of sound judicial discretion, within the appropriate normative framework.46 A. Documentary, testimonial, and expert evidence 52. The Court received the statements rendered before a public notary from the following victims, witnesses, and expert witnesses indicated in this section, regarding the topics mentioned below. The content of said statements is included in the corresponding chapter: 1) Diva Soares Santana, alleged victim, proposed by the Inter-American Commission. Declared on: a) the alleged efforts of the next of kin of the disappeared to obtain justice, truth, and reparation, as well as to know the whereabouts of the disappeared among them her sister, Dinaelza Santana Coqueiro and her brother-in-law Vandick Reidner Pereira Coqueiro, and b) the impact allegedly suffered by her and her family given the facts of the case; 2) Victoria Lavínia Grabois Olímpio, alleged victim, proposed by the Commission and the representatives. Declared on: a) her family relationship with her father, Mauricio Grabois; her brother, André Grabois, and her husband and father of her son, Gilberto Olímpio; b) the way in which she became aware of the alleged enforced disappearance of these persons; c) the impact in her life and that of her next of kin caused by said disappearances; d) the alleged personal efforts and actions taken by the next of kin to know the truth of that which occurred, obtain justice, and locate the bodily remains of her loved ones, and the obstacles confronted, and e) the alleged pecuniary and non-pecuniary consequences of the disappearances and the lack of truth and justice for her and her family; 3) Aldo Creder Corrêa; 4) Clóvis Petit de Oliveira; 5) Dilma Santana Miranda; 6) Dinorá Santana Rodrigues; 7) Dirceneide Soares Santana; 8) Elena Gibertini Castiglia; 9) Elza da Conceição Oliveira; 10) Helenalda Resende de Souza Nazareth; 11) Igor Grabois Olímpio; 12) João Carlos Schmidt de Almeida; 13) José Dalmo Ribeiro Ribas; 14) Junilia Soares Santana; 15) Lorena Moroni Girão Barroso; 16) Luíza Gurjão Farias; 17) 45 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 25, 2001. Series C No. 76, para. 50; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. v. México. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2010. Series C No. 216, para. 27, and Case Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 39. 46 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 8, 1998. Series C No. 37, para. 76; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 27, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 39.