recent reform of Justice and Peace process, must be clarified and, therefore, the statements of other individuals who have been demobilized, and even external sources, provide very important sources for comparison purposes.”84 76. Based on the foregoing, the Court notes that the statements of several paramilitaries were subject to verification by the Prosecutor General’s Office before, during and after they were made. In particular, as a result of the systematic analysis of these voluntary confessions, comparing them with the rest of the evidence, and the verification activities at different procedural opportunities, the Prosecutor General’s Office has prepared a “dossier” on the activities of the “Elmer Cárdenas bloc” that contains the following information: (a) Operation Genesis and the history of the Elmer Cárdenas bloc; (b) the different structure of the “bloc” identified by the prosecutor; (c) the structures handed over by Fredy Rendón with information on the military evolution of the “bloc” and the areas of activities; (d) the connection of the group to law enforcement personnel, the material used, the groups combated, the site of the camps and of the bases, and other information; (e) the chain of command, statutes and orders; (f) the bloc’s demobilization process; (g) the weapons used by the bloc, and (h) its ideology.85 These same confessions were also weighed, analyzed and compared with other evidence of a similar and a different nature in the context of the first instance judgment of the Eighth Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit of August 23, 2012 (infra para. 179). 77. Furthermore, regarding how the evidence examined in domestic proceedings is assessed, as indicated in other cases with regard to Colombia, the Court reiterates that it is not a criminal court and that, as a general rule, it is not for the Court to decide on the authenticity of the evidence produced in a domestic investigation when this has been considered valid in the competent judicial jurisdiction,86 unless violation of the guarantees of due process in obtaining, investigating, verifying or assessing the said evidence can be verified or proved directly. 78. In this case, the Court finds that the criteria used by both the domestic courts and the Prosecutor General’s Office to analyze the truth of the evidence provided by the statements of the demobilized paramilitaries are pertinent for the Court to make its own assessment of that evidence. Thus, the criteria used by the Colombian Supreme Court of Justice in order to assess confessions that are contradictory, inconsistent or that vary over time may be usefully and reasonably applied to the specific circumstances of this case in order to determine the judicial truth. 79. For these reasons, this Court considers that the voluntary confessions of the demobilized paramilitaries have probative value, taking into consideration, above all, the statements that have already been investigated, verified, compared with other evidence, classified and assessed by both the Prosecutor General’s Office and the Colombian criminal justice system and, also, taking into account the other elements of evidence and of context to determine which of the versions is most consistent with the rest of the evidence presented. C. Admission of the statements of the presumed victims, the expert witnesses, a deponent for information purposes, and a witness 80. The Court finds it pertinent to admit the statements and opinions provided during the public hearing and by affidavit, to the extent that they are in keeping with the purpose defined 84 Cf. Statement of Miguel Samper, deponent for information purposes proposed by the State, before the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights during the public hearing on February 12, 2013. 85 Cf. The Prosecutor General’s Office, Dossier on the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc, Genesis (evidence file, folios 44465, 45444, 45250, 45490, 45513, 45459, 45238 and ff.). 86 201. Cf. Case of the Santo Domingo Massacre v. Colombia. Preliminary objections, merits and reparations, para. 27