16. They also indicated that based on these facts, an investigation and criminal proceeding were launched that, although resulting in a partial conviction for the crimes of personal injuries and illegal deprivation of liberty, the sexual violence suffered by Linda Loaiza López remains in impunity. In addition they alleged that the investigation and criminal proceeding were marred by multiple irregularities, omissions, unjustified delays, disciplinary measures against judges hearing the case, and constant mistreatment of Linda López and her relatives at the hands of a variety of judicial branch officials, as well as the application of a number of stereotypes that resulted in the specific facts of sexual violence remaining in impunity. They added that the investigation was also skewed because the person identified as the perpetrator of Linda Loaiza López belonged to a wealthy family with political influence. 17. The petitioners specifically alleged that the State made serious omissions starting in the investigation stage into the facts with regard to the collection of evidence, the securing of the crime scene, and the care provided to Linda Loaiza López, given the fragile state in which she was found and the attacks of which she had been a victim. They held that DNA tests were never performed, even though there was enough evidence to do so; that materials of forensic interest were lost at the site due to improper safeguarding of the evidence; and that the photography of the scene and collection of evidence there were both deficient. They indicated that Luminol tests were never carried out at the apartment where she was rescued and that forensic tests were not performed until eight days after the rescue. They indicated that despite her serious injuries, Linda Loaiza López was subjected to numerous interviews by different representatives of the police and of the public prosecutor initially assigned to the case, as well as psychiatric evaluations carried out mostly by men, even though her medical history indicated that “she was fearful of the male gender.” 18. The petitioners also allege that the State did not take the measures necessary for the domestic judicial proceeding to be carried out under adequate conditions, given that Linda Loaiza López, her relatives, her attorney, and some judicial officials involved in the case were subjected to threats and harassment allegedly intended to get them to stop seeking justice. They alleged that domestic measures of protection were ordered for her, but they were not effective. They added that the State also failed to investigate the threats and harassment to discover their origin and prevent them from happening again. 19. They also alleged that Linda Loaiza López’s disappearance in the absence of help from the authorities, the news about what had taken place, her difficult recovery process, and the lack of justice in her case have caused her relatives profound suffering. They indicated that seeking justice impacted their financial situation and affected the dynamic of the family, whose members had to interrupt their activities or studies so they could travel to and stay in the city of Caracas to help Linda Loaiza López and follow the judicial proceeding. 20. The petitioners described the chronology of the internal proceedings, the details of which will be described in the section on proven facts based on the parties’ description and the evidence found in the case file. In this section, the Commission will summarize the legal arguments of the petitioners. 21. The petitioners first of all argued that the case should be analyzed in the light of international corpus juris on the protection of women from violence to establish the content and scope of the State’s obligations with regard to the facts and thereby determine its international responsibility. In that context, they held that the failure to comply with the duty to investigate and punish in cases of violence against women also constitutes a form of discrimination. 22. The petitioners argued that this case should be analyzed from a number of perspectives and “the exceptional seriousness of the violence suffered” by Linda Loaiza López should be taken into account, along with the “particular impact that sexual violence has on human dignity.” They asked that the sexual violence alleged in this case be considered a form of torture and noted that the constituent elements of such violation are present in the case. 23. Regarding intentionality, they stated that Linda Loaiza López was “raped repeatedly by her attacker, who also kept her deprived of her liberty, drugged, and tied up for several months in order to keep her under his control.” With regard to the goal or purpose, they indicated that “the serious acts of sexual