considers that the State has violated both the right to equal protection of the law (Article 24) and the obligation to respect and ensure, without discrimination, the rights recognized in the American Convention (Article 1(1)), because the facts of this case encompass both types of discrimination and, therefore, no distinction need be made. B.4. General conclusion 200. The Court considers that, in this case, the State failed to comply with its obligation to investigate the violent death of Claudina Velásquez as a possible expression of gender-based violence and with a gender approach. Also, the existence of gender stereotyping and prejudices, owing to which Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz was considered a person whose death did not deserve to be investigated, resulted in the failure to investigate the case diligently and thoroughly. This constituted violence against women and a form of gender-based discrimination in access to justice. 201. In the instant case, the Court has noted that the crime scene was not processed appropriately or with the thoroughness required to achieve positive results in the investigation; there was a failure to gather, record and preserve evidence, and irregularities were committed in the forensic medical examination, as well as in the autopsy and its respective report. These deficiencies in the initial investigation procedures are almost impossible to rectify, added to the loss of evidence that was irreparable. In addition, investigation procedures have been belated and repetitive and have extended over time; also, it is not clear why some of them were carried out. Also, appropriate lines of investigation were not followed. These flaws in the investigation are a direct result of the stereotyped appraisal that the investigating authorities made of the victim and of the absence of a gender perspective in the investigation. Thus, more than 10 years since the facts of the case and since the investigation was opened, the death of Claudina Velásquez remains in absolute impunity, over and above any reasonable time. 202. Based on the foregoing, the State violated the rights to judicial guarantees and judicial protection recognized in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, and the right to equality before the law recognized in Article 24 of the Convention, in relation to the general obligations contained in Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, and Article 7 of the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women, to the detriment of Jorge Rolando Velásquez Durán, Elsa Claudina Paiz Vidal and Pablo Andrés Velásquez Paiz, all next of kin of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz. 203. In addition, the Court finds that the alleged violation of Articles 13 and 22 of the American Convention was duly taken into consideration in the legal substantiation set out in this chapter, and that it is unnecessary to issue an autonomous ruling on their alleged violation. 70