by the State, who gave his expert opinion on the restructuring of the Venezuelan Police, and 13) Roberto Briceño León, researcher and university professor, expert witness required ex officio, who gave his expert opinion on the alleged problem of extrajudicial executions in different parts of Venezuela; the supposed pattern and modus operandi of this problem; the alleged incidence in Aragua state, and the supposed response to this situation of the Public Prosecution Service and the Judiciary. 14. Regarding the evidence given during the public hearing, the Court received the testimony of the following individuals:14 1) Eloisa Barrios, alleged victim proposed by the representatives, who testified on the alleged circumstances surrounding the death of her brothers and nephews, as well as the alleged violations of which she was a victim and those supposedly committed against her family; the actions taken to obtain justice and the response of the State authorities; the alleged suffering that the alleged violations and their impunity has caused her family; in particular, the alleged impact that the murder of her next of kin and the constant threats have had on her personally, her family life, and her life project; and also on the alleged illegal detentions of her son Víctor Daniel Cabrera Barrios in June 2009; 2) Néstor Castellano Molero, First Prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Service before the Cassation and Constitutional Chambers of the Supreme Court of Justice, witness proposed by the State, who testified on the State’s actions in relation to the judicial inquiries and proceedings in which the alleged victims in this case appeared as the aggrieved parties, and 3) Magaly Mercedes Vázquez González, lawyer, specialist in criminal science and criminology, expert witness proposed by the representatives, who gave her opinion on the law regulating criminal procedure in Venezuela at the time of the facts and the law currently in force in relation to the State’s role as guarantor of the rights to life, personal integrity and personal liberty; due diligence in the criminal proceedings in the cases involving the Barrios family, particularly the alleged factual and legal obstacles encountered throughout the investigations; the Forensic Unit of the Public Prosecution Service, the competence of the Forensic and Scientific Crime Investigation Unit (hereinafter “Scientific Investigation Unit” or “Investigation Unit”) to analyze the investigations, and the application of the witness protection law in Venezuela. B. Admission of the documentary evidence 15. In this case, as in others, the Court accepts those documents forwarded by the parties at the appropriate procedural opportunity, as well as those relating to supervening facts forwarded by the representatives and by the Inter-American Commission, which were not contested or opposed, and the authenticity of which was not questioned.15 14 On June 16, 2011, the Commission advised that expert witness Manfred Nowak, convened to give his expert opinion during the hearing, could not attend it and asked to replace him (merits file, tome III, folio 819). The President of the Court considered the Commission's request inadmissible (merits file, tome III, folio 839). 15 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Merits. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 1, para. 140, and Case of Barbani Duarte et al., supra note 12, para. 21. 11