34 The year before the death [of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa’s father, the latter was] very sad, very deteriorated, very pensive - someone who was morally destroyed, very quiet, very vulnerable even though he had his wife and his children attending to him, [and] emotionally vulnerable due to the abandonment, to the loss of all he had worked for, of his properties, of his businesses, of his people. [D]oña Adela, Mr. Jaramillo Correa’s mother, [is] a completely different person from the one […she] knew in [her] youth, because now she is very sad, very depressed, very silent[. She] does not leave the house, she says that she is unable to bear the burden of all the problems, [and] she talks about the family’s situation; that is, the separation, […] the distance.75 115. Since there is no dispute concerning the effect on their right to personal integrity, the Court finds, in accordance with the body of evidence, that the feelings of insecurity, frustration, anguish, and powerlessness that they have suffered for years and continue to suffer due to the events of February 1998 and, subsequently, to the State’s failure to comply with its obligation to investigate the facts (infra paras. 147 and 159 to 165), have caused a grave alteration in their way of life and in their family and social relations, with significant infringement of their right to personal integrity. Consequently, based on the State’s acceptance of facts and partial acquiescence, the Court finds that Colombia is responsible for the violation of the right to personal integrity recognized in Article 5(1) of the Convention, in relation to the general obligation to guarantee rights embodied in Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the following persons: María Leticia Valle Jaramillo, Ligia Valle Jaramillo, Luzmila Valle Jaramillo, Magdalena Valle Jaramillo, Romelia Valle Jaramillo, Marina Valle Jaramillo, Darío Valle Jaramillo, Octavio Valle Jaramillo, Alfonso Montoya Restrepo, Luis Fernando Montoya Valle, Gloria Lucía Correa, Carlos Enrique Jaramillo Correa, María Lucía Jaramillo Correa, Ana Carolina Jaramillo Correa, Jesús Emilio Jaramillo Barrera, Adela Correa de Jaramillo, Blanca Lucía Jaramillo Correa, Romelia Jaramillo Correa, Nellyda Jaramillo Correa, José María Jaramillo Correa, Luis Eugenio Jaramillo Correa, Gloria Elena Jaramillo Correa, and Adriana María Jaramillo Correa. E.2) Other persons that the State does not acknowledge as victims of the violation of Article 5(1) of the Convention 116. The Court observes that the State included the following persons in its acquiescence: Mauricio Alberto Herrera Valle, Claudia Helena Herrera Valle, and Liliana María Herrera Valle “as beneficiaries” of deceased victim Marina Valle Jaramillo (Jesús María Valle Jaramillo’s sister); Juan Guillermo Valle Noreña, John Jairo Valle Noreña, Berta Lucía Valle Noreña, and Luz Adriana Valle Noreña “as beneficiaries” of deceased victim Octavio Valle Jaramillo (Jesús María Valle Jaramillo’s brother), and Juliana Jaramillo Tobón and Santiago Jaramillo Tobón “as beneficiaries” of deceased victim José María Jaramillo Correa (Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa’s brother) (supra para. 38 and 111). In this regard, the Court notes that the State used a different legal definition for the “beneficiaries” and the “victims” of the violation of Article 5 de la Convention indicated in its acquiescence. Therefore, the Court understands that the State has not acknowledged the status of “victim” of the violation of the right to personal integrity of Mauricio Alberto Herrera Valle, Claudia Helena Herrera Valle, Liliana María Herrera Valle, Juan Guillermo Valle Noreña, John Jairo Valle Noreña, Berta Lucía Valle Noreña, Luz Adriana Valle Noreña, Juliana Jaramillo Tobón, and Santiago Jaramillo Tobón, but instead considers them beneficiaries of the reparations that correspond to the victims who are deceased and who were acknowledged as such by the State (supra para. 115). 117. Based on the above, the Court observes that it was alleged that the following 40 persons were presumed victims of the violation of Article 5(1) of the Convention and that 75 Statement made before notary public by the witness, María Amanda Correa Zuleta, on January 9, 2008 (file of affidavits and the respective observations, folios 2233 and 2234).