77 withdraw from the place without covering the story. The State does not mention this fact in the arguments nor does it mention any of the investigative steps it would have taken. 269. The incident was reported on March 8, 2006; though there is no record that an investigation has been conducted (infra para. 302 and 318). 270. The evidence furnished regarding this fact270 suggests it is possible to consider that Mrs. Mayela León was prevented from performing her job. * * * 271. The Commission argued that on July 11, 2005 a news team led by reporter Mayela León failed to cover a story in the vicinity of Palacio de Miraflores since they felt intimidated by insults shouted at them by the people who were there. The commission mentions that the video, in which the images of the protest were recorded, was stolen by private individuals and later on recovered and seized by the National Guard, under the protection of a security zone decree271. 272. This tribunal notes that the Commission tendered a video provided by the representatives in the procedure of provisional measures272. The video shows several scenes of peaceful demonstrations organized in different places. On occassions, it is possible to see people being interviewed by Globovisión and, in a newscast, Mrs. Mayela León is telling the facts described in the complaint, but there are no images of such incidents, just the account of them. 273. The incident was reported on March 8, 2006; though there is no record that an investigation has been conducted (infra para. 302 and 318). 274. This Court notes that the evidence furnished273 is not ample and sufficient to consider this fact proven. * * * 270 Cf. Video (appendix 34 to the application); brief of October 26, 2004 filed before the 68º Public Prosecutor Office of Caracas Metropolitan Area (records of evidence, volume V, pages 1671-1749); affidavit rendered by Mayela León Rodriguez on April 15, 2008 (records of evidence, volume XXXIII, pages 8768-8772) and copy of the complaint filed with the Attorney General's Office on March 8, 2006 (records of evidence, volume XIV, pages 40804140). 271 The Commission alleged in the application that “On July 11, 2005, a team of journalists led by reporter Mayela León went to the Miraflores Palace to cover a protest by a group of individuals left homeless following heavy rains who were asking the President of the Republic to provide them with housing. The team did not cover the story because they felt intimidated by insults leveled at them by people who were there and by threats made against the cameraman and his assistant, followed by the removal of the video containing the images of the protest. All this took place in the vicinity of the Miraflores Palace, because of which the National Guard, covered by a security zone degree, was able to recover and confiscate the cassette. The National Guard allowed them to enter at their own risk and later asked them to leave”. 272 The Commission literally quotes as evidence “Video, APPENDIX 14 of APPENDIX E of the brief of the beneficiaries’ representatives of November 15, 2005, in the provisional measures proceedings (already with the Court).” There is no record of any brief submitted on that date. Nevertheless, the fact is mentioned in a brief of August 30, 2005 of the representatives and the corresponding video was forwarded. Reference to the video may be found in such brief (records of provisional measures, volume VI, pages 1756 and 2003). Cf. supra para. 106. 273 The only evidence available regarding this fact is the copy of the complaint filed with the Attorney General's Office on March 8, 2006 (records of evidence, volume XIV, pages 4080-4140).