10 (b) Clotilde Elena Rodríguez, witness proposed by the representatives, who testified about the business activities of the alleged victim and his family, and about their alleged drastic impoverishment and isolation from their neighbors and society as a result of articles in the social communications media regarding the supposed offenses committed by the alleged victim;19 (c) Matías Alejandro Colaci, witness proposed by the representatives, who testified about the fears and the state of anguish and despair of the alleged victim’s family while he was deprived of his liberty, and about the alleged serious depression and fears that the alleged victim suffered and continues to suffer as a result of the medical problems arising from detention,20 and (d) Noemí Virginia Julia Martínez, witness proposed by the representatives, who testified about the suffering and “anguish” suffered by the alleged victim and his family, as well as about their impoverishment and social isolation as a result of the facts.21 33. Also, expert appraisals were received from: (a) Juan Carlos Ziella, expert witness, doctor in general medicine, proposed by the State, who gave his expert opinion on the degree of harm caused to the alleged victim and the consequences that could be attributed to the reported facts,22 and (b) Aviel Tolcachier, expert witness, psychiatrist, proposed by the State, who gave his expert opinion on the impact and consequences that the reported facts may have had on the alleged victim.23 34. In addition, during a public hearing, the Court received the testimony of the following persons: a) Juan Carlos Bayarri, alleged victim, deponent proposed by the Inter-American Commission and the representatives, who referred to the circumstances in which he alleged that he had been deprived of his liberty, tortured and subjected to preventive detention; the supposed lack of an appropriate judicial response in relation to the criminal responsibility of the authors of the offenses perpetrated against him, and the harm caused to him; b) Luis Eduardo Garré, expert witness proposed by the Inter-American Commission and the representatives, who gave his expert opinion on the physical consequences for the alleged victim of the alleged unlawful and arbitrary deprivation 19 Cf. testimony rendered before notary public (affidavit) by Clotilde Elena Rodríguez on April 3, 2008 (merits file, tome V, folios 913 to 917). 20 Cf. testimony rendered before notary public (affidavit) by Matías Alejandro Colaci on April 3, 2008 (merits file, tome V, folios 930 to 933). 21 Cf. testimony rendered before notary public (affidavit) by Noemí Virginia Julia Martínez on April 4, 2008 (merits file, tome V, folios 918 to 925). By an order of March 14, 2008, supra note 1, fifth operative paragraph, the President of the Court convened Noemí Virginia Julia Martínez to provide her testimony at the public hearing. However, the representatives advised that “owing to her advanced age” and recent health problems, the witness called would be unable to attend the said hearing; they therefore forwarded her testimony rendered before notary public (affidavit). Cf. brief of the representatives of April 8, 2008 (merits file, tome V, folios 910 to 911). Neither the Inter-American Commission nor the State raised any objection in this regard. 22 Cf. written expert appraisal by Dr. Juan Carlos Ziella (merits file, tome V, folios 1046 to 1050). 23 Cf. written expert appraisal by Dr. Aviel Tolcachier (merits file, tome V, folios 1051 to 1057).