14 a) b) c) d) the issues of fact and the alleged violation of the right to humane treatment to the detriment of the next of kin of the alleged victims, enshrined in Article 5 of the Convention; the alleged violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention, to the detriment of the alleged victims and their next of kin, with regard to the arguments denied by the State (supra para. 53.); the alleged failure to comply with Article 2 of the Convention (supra para. 54), and the issues of fact related to pecuniary and non pecuniary damage that would have been inflicted on the alleged victims and their next of kin, as well as the determination of reparations and immunities. VI EVIDENCE 59. In accordance with Articles 44 and 45 of the Rules of Procedure and the Court´s case law regarding the evidence and its assessment,5 the Court shall proceed to examine and assess the documentary evidence submitted by the Commission, the representatives and the State in various procedural stages or as evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case as was requested pursuant to instructions of the President, as well as the testimony of witnesses and expert witness opinions rendered through affidavits or before the Court. With that purpose, the Court will follow the rules of reasonable credit and weight analysis, within the corresponding legal frame.6 A) DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 60. The Commission and the representatives submitted the statements of witnesses and the reports of expert witnesses, pursuant to the Order of the President, issued on of August 17, 2006 (supra para. 23.) Subsequently, the Court summarizes the said statements: Statements of witnesses proposed by the representatives a) Carmen Rosa Amaro-Cóndor, sister of Armando Richard Amaro-Cóndor Her brother was the first member of the family to attend university; he contributed to the household, and was planning to graduate and continue further studies His main goals were to study, work and help his younger siblings and parents. The witness loved and respected him, and considered him her friend. She felt great sorrow and grief when her brother disappeared as no one knew anything on his whereabouts. Then, when she learnt of the discovery of graves through the television, she had mixed feelings, as even though there was not much hope of finding him alive, “one is not willing to accept death.” “All [her] siblings started wailing and banging their heads, Cf. Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. Judgment of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 154, paras. 66-69; Case Servellón García et al., supra note 1, paras. 32-35; and Case of Ximenes-Lopes. Judgment of July 4, 2006. Series C No. 149, paras. 42-45. 5 6 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 1, para. 55.