18 María Teresa De La Cruz Flores, Abdón Segundo Salazar Morán, Mario Pablo Rodríguez Hurtado and José Daniel Rodríguez Robinson (supra paras. 24 and 27).12 52. During the public hearing, the witness proposed by the Inter-American Commission, Álvaro Eduardo Vidal Rivadeneyra,13 the expert witness proposed by the alleged victim’s representatives, Manuel Pérez González,14 and the State15 and the alleged victim’s representatives16 presented various documents (supra para. 29). 53. On July 8, 2004, the State submitted documents relating to the change of the alleged victim’s order of detention to one of conditional appearance (supra para. 30).17 54. The State,18 the Commission19 and the alleged victim’s representatives20 forwarded various documents as appendixs to their final written arguments submitted on July 28, August 2 and 4, 2004, respectively (supra para. 31). The State also forwarded an appendix with its brief of September 17, 2004 (supra para. 35).21 55. The alleged victim’s representatives submitted several documents, based on Article 44 of the Rules of Procedure (supra para. 34),22 some of them originating “after the presentation of the [final] written arguments” (supra para. 36).23 12 Cf. file with the State’s comments on the affidavits, appendixes 1 to 6 of the brief with comments on the testimonial statement made before notary public by María Teresa De la Cruz Flores, folios 841 to 898; file with the State’s comments on the affidavits, appendix 1 of the brief with comments on the testimonial statement made before notary public by Abdón Segundo Salazar Morán, folios 904 to 905; file with the State’s comments on the affidavits, appendixes 1 to 13 of the brief with comments on the expert report made before notary public by Mario Pablo Rodríguez Hurtado, folios 915 to 991; and file with the State’s comments on the affidavits, appendixes 1 to 15 of the brief with comments on the expert report made before notary public by José Daniel Rodríguez Robinson, folios 1008 to 1092. 13 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome III, folios 816 to 944. 14 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome IV, folios 982 to 1012. 15 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome III, folios 948 to 950. 16 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome III, folios 953 to 970. 17 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome III, folios 781 to 789. 18 Cf. file of appendixes to the final written arguments, appendixes 1 to 14 to the final written arguments of the State, folios 1232 to 1300. 19 Cf. file of appendixes to the final written arguments, appendixes 1 to 4 to the final written arguments of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, folios 1198 to 1231. 20 Cf. file of appendixes to the final written arguments, appendixes 1 to 16 to the final written arguments of the alleged victim’s representatives, folios 1095 to 1197. 21 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome V, folios 1240 to 1260. 22 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome V, folios 1280 to 1287. 23 Cf. file on merits, reparations, and costs, tome V, folios 1263 to 1271.