01005684 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 2.3.5. Final Assessment of the Evidence 2.3.5.1. 34. Probative Value The Chamber bases its findings on evidence put before it and subjected to adversarial debate.89 In conjunction with final submissions, the Chamber considers objections to the probative value of evidence made at trial, particularly those that went beyond the prima facie relevance and reliability of proposed evidence.90 Various factors are relevant to the probative value of evidence including the criteria set out in Internal Rule 87(3),91 the circumstances surrounding the creation or recording of evidence, whether the original or a copy was admitted, legibility, discrepancies with other versions, deficiencies credibly alleged, whether the parties had the opportunity to challenge the evidence and other indicia of reliability including chain of custody and provenance.92 The Chamber also considers the identification, examination, bias, source and motive – or lack thereof – of the authors and sources of the evidence.93 89 Internal Rule 87(2). The Chamber notes that the English version of this rule requires that evidence be “subjected to examination” while the French version requires that it be “débattues contradictoirement”. 90 Decision on Objections to Documents Proposed to be Put Before the Chamber in the CoProsecutors’ Annexes A1-A5 and to Documents Cited in Paragraphs of the Closing Order Relevant to the First Two Trial Segments of Case 002/01, E185, 9 April 2012, paras 21, 30; Decision on Objections Proposed to be Put before the Chamber in Co-Prosecutors’ Annexes A6-A11 and by the Other Parties, E185/1, 3 December 2012, paras 13, 19; Third Decision on Objections to Documents Proposed for Admission before the Trial Chamber, E185/2, 12 August 2013, paras 20, 24, 26; Decision on Objections to the Admissibility of Witness, Victim and Civil Party Statements and Case 001 Transcripts Proposed by the Co-Prosecutors and Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyers, E299, 15 August 2013, paras 21, 23, 26, 30, 32. 91 The Chamber takes into account whether evidence is irrelevant or repetitious, impossible to obtain within a reasonable time, unsuitable to prove the facts it purports to prove, not allowed under the law or intended to prolong proceedings (Internal Rule 87(3)). 92 See e.g. Decision on Objections to Documents Proposed to be Put Before the Chamber in the CoProsecutors’ Annexes A1-A5 and to Documents Cited in Paragraphs of the Closing Order Relevant to the First Two Trial Segments of Case 002/01, E185, 9 April 2012, paras 30, 34 and fn. 49; Decision on Defence Requests Concerning Irregularities Alleged to Have Occurred During the Judicial Investigation (E221, E223, E224, E224/2, E234, E234/2, E241 and E241/1), E251, 7 December 2012, paras 26, 28, 36; Decision on Co-Prosecutors’ Rule 92 Submission Regarding the Admission of Witness Statements and Other Documents before the Trial Chamber, E96/7, 20 June 2012, paras 17, 25-29. 93 Decision on Co-Prosecutors’ Rule 92 Submission Regarding the Admission of Witness Statements and Other Documents before the Trial Chamber, E96/7, 20 June 2012, para.24; Decision on Assignment of Experts, E215, 5 July 2012, para. 15; Decision on Objections to Documents Proposed to be Put Before the Chamber in the Co-Prosecutors’ Annexes A1-A5 and to Documents Cited in Paragraphs of the Closing Order Relevant to the First Two Trial Segments of Case 002/01, E185, 9 April 2012, para. 14. Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 17