38. The Inter-American Commission stated that “the facts of this case form part of a specific pattern of persecution against members of to family which, in turn, is part of a more general problem of extrajudicial executions by the regional police in Venezuela, with significant incidence in Aragua state.” Several of the “murders have been preceded by threats against and physical injuries to the victims and these acts have continued against other members of the family, especially those who witnessed the previous incidents or dared to denounce them.” Lastly, “the series of incidents reveals a pattern of concealment that begins with the perpetrators’ distortion of the events, continues with the lack of judicial elucidation, and includes the implementation of various types of threats and harassment designed to prevent the determination of the truth and the identification of those responsible. All of the above […] has been tolerated by the different State authorities. 39. The representatives stated that, in Venezuela, there is a serious problem of the violation of fundamental rights by State agents, including illegal arrests, followed by extrajudicial executions, as well as arbitrary searches, which are carried out with excessive and indiscriminate use of force.” In turn, the “phenomenon of extrajudicial executions by police officials […] is closely related to the widespread impunity that characterizes the administration of justice.” In addition, they indicated that: (a) the extrajudicial executions by State agents involve a specific modus operandi; (b) the victims are “generally young men, including a considerable number of minors, belonging to the poorest sectors of the population,” and (c) a “generalized situation of impunity” exists. 40. The State asserted that the deaths of the members of the Barrios family “are isolated incidents and there is no evidence to establish common grounds that connect them. To date, the only two cases in which officers have been charged because there was a confrontation with the police [are those] of Benito Antonio Barrios and Narciso Barrios. In the other four cases, there is no conclusive evidence determining that confrontations with police officers [occurred]; and, [in the case of] the last victim, Juan José Barrios, it was found that the perpetrator had no ties with police officials.” Furthermore, “it is unreasonable for the Inter-American Commission to assert that Venezuela has a State policy of extrajudicial executions […], using the case of the Barrios family as an example; moreover, although it is unfortunately true that seven members of the family have died, it is no less true that the Venezuelan State has been conducting systematic investigations into each incident. Lastly, it asked the Court to “examine this case carefully, [because] it cannot be generalized to draw such absurd conclusions as that extrajudicial executions are a State policy in Venezuela. 41. The Commission and the representatives referred to two contexts in the instant case: (a) one of extrajudicial executions by police groups in Venezuela, and (b) another of persecution against the Barrios family. The Court observes that both the Commission’s Report on Merits, and the representatives’ pleadings and motions brief and final written arguments refer to reports by State agencies and non-governmental organizations, which the parties did not provide to the body of evidence in this case, in keeping with the provisions of Articles 35(1)(e) and 42(2)(b). To prove the alleged context, the Commission and the representatives submitted five reports of the Ombudsman’s Office for 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2008, the 2009 National Survey on Victimization and Perception of Public Safety, and a 2005 report by COFAVIC on para-police groups. 42. In this regard, the Court notes that the 2009 Survey on Victimization randomly interviewed 5,496 households in the country between September and October of 2006. One of its objectives was “to identify and to describe the public’s perception of vulnerability and public safety in relation to criminal activities and the social responses to crime.” However, the Survey does not refer to the phenomenon of extrajudicial executions alleged by the 18