The claim about 'one in ten children under the age of 13' is not directly supported by the provided web search or Wikipedia results. The evidence focuses on Meta's failure to prevent minors from using the platforms, but does not quantify the usage rate as 10%.

The claim that the Commission stated Meta's age enforcement measures are largely ineffective because children can enter a false date of birth without verification is not explicitly detailed in the provided evidence. While the evidence confirms Meta's age enforcement is a subject of the investigation, the specific detail about the lack of verification mechanism is not corroborated by multiple sources.

The claim that the European Commission found 10-12% usage and that this contradicts Meta's internal assessments is mentioned in the context of the web search results, but the specific percentage (10-12%) and the direct contradiction to Meta's internal assessments are not independently corroborated by multiple sources.

The claim that the European Commission found Meta disregarded scientific evidence regarding the vulnerability of younger children is present in the web search results, but the specific finding and the finding that Meta 'disregarded' the evidence are not corroborated by multiple independent sources.

The claim that Meta stated that Instagram and Facebook are intended for people aged 13 and older and that it has measures in place to detect and remove underage accounts is consistent with the general narrative of Meta's defense, but the specific quote and detailed statement are not independently corroborated by multiple sources.