91 Article 283 The facts and the evidence that supports them shall be assessed using the criterion of conscience. 179. Therefore, the judgment delivered in the civil trial that convicted Lori Berenson (supra para. 88(69)) was formulated in accordance with the criteria for assessing the evidence and stating the grounds for the facts established in Peruvian legislation. The Inter-American Court will not rule on the choice of this system of assessing evidence, which is closely related to that observed in the trial by jury adopted by several legal systems. 180. Finally, the Court observes that, in several considering paragraphs of the judgment of June 20, 2001 (supra paras. 88(62) to 88(69)), the National Terrorism Chamber formulated its reasoning in relation to the evidence that it admitted and accepted to support the judgment. 181. In view of the above, this Court considers that it has not been proved that the State violated Article 8(2)(b), (c) and (d) of the Convention to the detriment of the alleged victim in relation to the trial against her in the ordinary jurisdiction. * * * Right to examine witnesses 182. Article 8(2)(f) of the Convention stipulates: 2. […] During the proceedings, every person is entitled, with full equality, to the following minimum guarantees: [...] f) the right of the defense to examine witnesses present in the court and to obtain the appearance, as witnesses, of experts or other persons who may throw light on the facts; a) Criminal proceeding in the military jurisdiction 183. The Court considers, as it has on previous occasions, that Article 13(c) of Decree Law No. 25,475 applied in this case, prevented exercising the right to crossexamine witnesses whose statements provided grounds for the charged against the alleged victim.256 On the one hand, the cross-examination of the police and army agents who had taken part in the investigation procedures was disallowed.257 On the other hand, as has been indicated (supra para. 88(27)), the fact that the defense lawyer did not intervene until the alleged victim had made her statement to the police, meant that he was unable to refute the evidence compiled and on record in the police investigation report.258 256 Cf. Case of Castillo Petruzzi et al., supra note 25, para. 153. 257 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides, supra note 25, para. 127; Case of Castillo Petruzzi et al., supra note 25, para. 153; and Article 13, paragraph (c) of Decree Law No. 25,475 (file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 12, folios 9355 to 9368). 258 Cf. Case of Castillo Petruzzi et al., supra note 25, para. 153.