59 “disappointed to see that the State is weak in terms of justice,” with “a lack of trust in the authorities” and “frustrated, without any sentiments of joy towards life.” 210. Ramiro Osorio Cristales, alleged surviving victim of the massacre, expressed his suffering in his statement delivered during the public hearing236. He indicated that “I thought that justice would be made in this world, that one day all of this would be clarified, and that I wouldn’t be suffering all the time.” Additionally, he stated that he “would return to Guatemala, but I will never walk around with peace, I am afraid, primarily because the murderers are still free.” Likewise, in his statement provided during the internal proceeding he expressed that he had wanted to give his statement in that proceeding “because I have kept this inside for a long time, it is a pain I have always carried in my heart.” 237 211. Expert witness Nieves Gomez Dupuis, in her affidavit presented before the Court, expressed that the lack of justice “favors that, since no parties have been declared guilty of the facts, the blame reverts to the victims, and these remain stigmatized,” which in addition to the “fear, silence, sadness, constant memories of the massacre, situations of altered mourning, uncertainty over the children’s whereabouts, the fear that the same could happen to their relatives, anger, and a deep impotence” generate psychological damages and effects, that not only affect the victims, but also “[t]he second generation [that] has been affected […] by the effects of the impunity and absence of justice, expressing feelings of anger, sadness and pain in the face of the lack of an investigation and punishment of those guilty of the massacre.” 212. Likewise, expert witness Marco Antonio Garavito Fernandez, in his affidavit presented before the Court, expressed that, with regard to the relatives, “there is an emotional damage resulting from the uncertainty of what really happened to their loved ones,” which inhibits the “mourning process” from being completed. In addition to the above, there is a process of “re-victimiza[tion…] due to the absence of a State that is concerned with the reestablishment of the family ties lost.” 213. The Court observes that from the statements and expert opinions rendered, it is evidenced that the impunity that persists in the instant case is experienced by the alleged victims as a new traumatic impact, which has been generated by feelings of anger, frustration and even fear of retaliation due to their search for justice. 214. On the other hand, considering that the two survivors of the massacre, Ramiro Osorio Cristales and Salomé Gómez Hernández, were children, the Court reiterates that they “have […] special rights derived from their condition, which correspond to specific obligations of the family, society and the State238”, in conformity with Article 19 of the American Convention. 236 In this regard, in the public hearing of July 14, 2009 before this Court, Ramiro Osorio Cristales declared that “it was after that the Massacre began on the morning of the 8th. I did not see when they dilled my father or my brother. But you could hear the cries for mercy, asking to please not kill them. Then it was my mother’s turn. When my mother was taken out, we clung to her and told them to please not kill her. There was a man at the door, a soldier grabbed and told me not to leave because they were going to kill me. So I went to see how, through the cracks of the walls of the church, I went to see how they killed my mother and my little sister who was between nine months to one year old. They grabbed my sister by the feet and smashed her against a tree and threw her in the well. They cut my mom’s throat and threw her in the well. My brothers’ throats were slit and they were thrown in the well. And from crying so much I fell asleep under one of the pews of the church, and when I woke up the Massacre had already ended.” 237 Cf. Statement of “Ramiro Fernando López García” as evidenced produced before trial, supra note 169, fs. 3827 to 3831. 238 Cf. Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child. Advisory Opinion OC-17/02, supra note 204, para. 54.