25 authorities to investigate.86 Among the issues to be considered, it could be mentioned the closeness of the family relationship, the particular circumstances of the relationship with the victim, the degree to which a family member was a witness of the events, the way in which the family member was involved in the search for justice and the State's response to the steps undertaken.87 78. In the instant case, there is no controversy among the parties regarding the fact that the personal integrity of Mrs. Etelvina Zapata Escué (mother), Myriam Zapata Escué (daughter), Bertha Escué Coicue (companion) and Francya Doli Escué Zapata (sister) and Mr. Mario Pasu (father), Aldemar Escué Zapata, Yonson Escué Zapata, Ayénder Escué Zapata, Omar Zapata and Albeiro Pasu (brothers) has been violated by the claimed facts. 79. The Court only wishes to point out that the mother, wife, daughter and brother, Aldemar Escué Zaàta, were in the dwelling during the search carried out by State agents,88 so that they witnessed the detention and the ill-treatment suffered by the victim. According to the State agents, the companion of the victim was begging them not to take him.89 Furthermore, the relatives were the ones who, minutes later, found the body of Mr. Escué Zapata.90 Resides, as the State acknowledged (supra para. 11 and 15) the delay in the investigation, prosecution and punishment of the responsible also provoked mental and moral damage to the victim’s next of kin. However, though the Court positively values the fact that the State delivered the mortal rests of the victim to its relatives, it considers that 86 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala, supra note 85, para. 160, Case of the Rochela Massacre v. Colombia, supra note 7, para. 137; Case of Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru, supra note 17, para. 335. 87 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala, supra note 85, para. 163; Case of Bueno Alves v. Argentina, supra note 9, para. 102; Case of the Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru, supra note 17, para. 335. 88 Cf. Statement rendered by Etelvina Zapata, on September 22, 1994 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 1, page 1740); statement rendered by Mr. Aldemar Escué Zapata on July 1, 1999 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 1, page 1804); statement rendered by Etelvina Zapata in the public hearing held before the Inter-American Commission on October 17, 2002; statement rendered by Bertha Escué Coicue, on December 4, 2002 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Folder 1, page 1905); statement rendered by Omaira Escué Coicue, on December 4, 2002 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 1, page 1915); statement rendered by Mr. Aldemar Escué Zapata on November 30, 2002 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 1, page 1913); statement rendered by Bertha Escué Coicue, on January 16, 2007 (record of the merits, Volume III, page 606); statement rendered by Marco Tulio Cañas Torres, on February 24, 2006 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 3, page 2334); statement rendered by Francisco Javier Bedoya Aguirre, on March 18, 2006 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 3, page 2403); statement rendered by Oscar Iván Arias Herrera on March 18, 2006 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 3, page 2410), and statement rendered by Hidelbran Castro Quintero on March 17, 2006 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file Folder 1, page 2389). 89 Cf. statement rendered by Marco Tulio Cañas Torres, on February 24, 2006 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s File, Folder 3, Page 2334); statement rendered by Hidelbran Castro Quintero, on March 17, 2006 (record of Appendixes to answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 3, page 2389); statement rendered by Francisco Javier Aguirre on March 18, 2006 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 3, page 2403), and statement rendered by Oscar Iván Arias Herrera of March 18, 2006 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor's file, Folder 3, page 2410). 90 Cf. Statement rendered by Mario Pasu on May 27, 1999 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor's file, Folder 1, page 1782); statement rendered by Mr. Aldemar Escué Zapata on July 1, 1999 (record of Appendixes of the answer to the complaint, Prosecutor’s file, Folder 1, page 1805); statement rendered by Etelvina Zapata in the public hearing held before the Inter-American Commission on October 17, 2002; statement rendered by Mr. Aldemar Escué Zapata on November 30, 2002 (record of Appendixes to the answer of the complaint, Prosecutor's file, Folder 1, page 1912); affidavit rendered by Mario Pasu, on January 16, 2007 (record of the merits, Volume III, page 645), affidavit rendered by Bertha Escué Coicue on January 16, 2007 (record of the merits, Volume III, page 606) and affidavit rendered by Ayénder Escué Zapata on January 16, 2007 (record of the merits, Volume III, page 652).