Definite article for "Evidence"

The original sentence is:
"Campaigners now have compelling documentary evidence of the human rights abuses that they had been alleging for several years."

Several different versions made up by me:
1. "Campaigners now have the compelling documentary evidence of the human rights abuses that they had been alleging for several years."
Does the extra "the" imply some of the documentary evidence aren't compelling?

2. "Campaigners now have the documentary evidence of the human rights abuses that they had been alleging for several years."
Does the extra "the" imply some of the evidence aren't documentary?

3. "Campaigners now have documentary evidence of the human rights abuses that they had been alleging for several years."
Is this one ok?

4. "Campaigners now have the evidence of the human rights abuses that they had been alleging for several years."
Is this one ok?

5. "Campaigners now have evidence of the human rights abuses that they had been alleging for several years."
Is this one wrong because "evidence" is made definite by "the human rights absuses"?

Thanks a lot!!

Thanks tattered

Tattered wrote:

the word the is more commonly used in reference to a singular thing, or a group (like the teachers at your school).

"I like the teachers of my school".
"They have (no the?) evidence of human rights abuses".

Why isn't "evidence" also treated as a definite group to which is being referred? (like the teachers of my school)
It's "the evidence of human rights abuses" but not "the evidence of something else.", and I always try to add "the" to a noun that has a reference to it. In this case, "my school" refers to "teachers", and "human rights abuses" refers to "evidence", no? Is it just like "They have the keys to those doors."

I just encountered three sentences:

"We have (no the?) evidence that at least some dark matter blahblahblah"

"a supercluster is most likely to have formed in (no the?) regions of space where blahblahblah"

"What do (no the?) observations of galaxies tell us about blahblahblah"

Are "evidence", "regions" and "observations" above all definite just like "the teachers at my school"? If they are, how come there's no "the" before it? I'm really confused now, please tell me what you think.

Thanks a lot!!

The use of the zero article in English depends on the kind of noun this article refers to.

Within your second sentence: "I like the teachers of my school", the noun "teacher" is a countable concrete noun and thus requires the definite article.

The noun "evidence" on the other hand is a non-count abstract noun (in English you can't count evidence, it's the same as with "literature", "time" or "science"). This is generally expressed by the zero article!

Just tried to answer at least a tiny bit of it...

If I happen to find out more, I'll post it here!!

Starstuff wrote:

Thanks tattered  Tattered wrote: the word the is more commonly used in reference to a singular thing, or a group (like the teachers at your school). "I like the teachers of my school". "They have (no the?) evidence of human rights abuses". Why isn't "evidence" also treated as a definite group to which is being referred? (like the teachers of my school) It's "the evidence of human rights abuses" but not "the evidence of something else.", and I always try to add "the" to a noun that has a reference to it. In this case, "my school" refers to "teachers", and "human rights abuses" refers to "evidence", no? Is it just like "They have the keys to those doors." (I think) As told in one of the following posts (possibly by Mr. Paco) that the nature of the nouns "teachers" and "evidence" is different: One is countable and the other is uncountable. Aside from that, when you ask why there is no definite article in front of the word "evidence," I would say that a person normally wouldn't put the definite article in the sentential context you had it on.     I just encountered three sentences: "We have (no the?) evidence that at least some dark matter blahblahblah" Same sort of explanation "a supercluster is most likely to have formed in (no the?) regions of space where blahblahblah" Could work either with no the and with the, I think. "What do (no the?) observations of galaxies tell us about blahblahblah" Same sort of explanation Are "evidence", "regions" and "observations" above all definite just like "the teachers at my school"? If they are, how come there's no "the" before it? I'm really confused now, please tell me what you think. Thanks a lot!!