40 lack of substantive results after eight years since the investigations began has had an impact on her psychological integrity. Notwithstanding the aforementioned, the State affirmed that there is no violation to the right to personal integrity in relation with the right to health due to the alleged lack of primary medical care regarding the initial occasions she sought medical care. To the contrary, Mrs. Rosendo Cantú received primary medical care in an immediate manner when she went before the health system in the state of Guerrero, where she reported abdominal pain. In this manner, the “medical health personnel was at the service of the alleged victim at all times, to assess and diagnose her, and where applicable, provide the appropriate medication pursuant to the health norms in force in the state.” * * * 127. The Court accepted the acknowledgment of international responsibility of the State in regards to the violation of the right to personal integrity, since the complaint was filed before the Common [local] Public Prosecutor’s Office, to the detriment of Mrs. Rosendo Cantú, in relation to the recognized violations of Articles 8(1), 25, and 19 of the American Convention (supra paras. 21 to 25). 128. Likewise, the Court notes that from the statements provided by Mrs. Rosendo Cantú, there are evident impacts to her personal integrity related to the treatment she received when she filed the complaint before the authorities137 and the obstacles she faced in the search for justice, and the feelings of fear given the military presence.138 129. Notwithstanding the acknowledgment of responsibility of the State, the representatives argued that Mrs. Rosendo Cantu’s personal integrity was impacted “because she was prevented from accessing primary health care services […] immediately after the rape,” the first time on February 18, 2002, “under the argument that there was no technical equipment and that the doctor was afraid of the soldiers” and on February 25, 2002, “when she went to the Ayutla General Hospital and did not have a doctor’s appointment.” On its behalf, the State contested this argument stating that Mrs. Rosendo Cantú “received medical care […] in an immediate manner when she presented herself before the health care system in the state of Guerrero.” 130. Of the evidence in the case file, it states that Mrs. Rosendo Cantú went to the clinic of Caxitepec on February 18, 2002, and to the Ayutla Hospital on February 26, of the same year. Of the corresponding medical report, it is evident that on February 18, 137 Mrs. Rosendo Cantú stated: “when i went to file a complaint at the offices of the Public Prosecutor in Ayutla […] there they did not want to let me enter becaue they said that there was no person who could take my statement and there was also an attorney there who told us that the workday was over, […] and that is when the Commission of human rights of the state had to get involved to file a complaint. And when I entered they knew that I did not speak Spanish well, and they didnt give me a translator, and when I finally spoke and gave my statement, they told me, ‘how did you know they were soldiers who raped you? Because they don’t do that, they are good.’ And, they also told me, ‘how did they say that to you if you said you don’t speak Spanish, and how do you know it was soldiers who raped you.’ […] Then we left, I thought I was only going to file a complaint and they were going to catch the soldiers who raped me, but that did not happen,” statement of Rosendo Cantú rendered at the public hearing, supra note 64. 138 Mrs. Rosendo Cantú stated: “despite that […] they told me that I was going to speak to the military justice system, how was I going to go there if they never believed me […] and I was so afraid because of the fear, and, how was I going to go to the military justice system if they were the ones that abused me?” statement of Mrs. Rosendo Cantú rendered at the public hearing, supra note 96. She also stated: “I have a justified fear that the […] investigation will be […] unlawfully handed over to the Military Public Prosecutor, with serious detriment to my individual guarantees, petition for relief [amparo] filed by Mrs. Rosendo Cantú before First District Judge of the Twenty-first Circuit in the state of Guerrero on June 6, 2002 (case file of annexes to the application, annex 20, tome I, folio 506). She also indicated: “I did not want to go out because of the memory the soldiers left me with was very big […] I was very scared […] [I] did not want to leave my community, I didn’t leave because I wanted to leave, rather I left because of the fear that there were many soldiers,” statement of Mrs. Rosendo Cantú rendered during the public hearing, supra note 64.