extrajudicial executions 390 or torture, 391 the Court has considered that the Commission or the representatives do not need to prove the violation of personal integrity because a juris tantum presumption exists. 392 Accordingly, it is for the State to disprove this 393 if it considers that the said violation did not occur. 352. The Court has applied this presumption with regard to the direct family, such as mothers and fathers, daughters and sons, wives and husbands, and permanent companions, provided that it responds to the particular circumstances of the case. 394 353. Nevertheless, the Court notes that it does not have temporal competence to determine violations in relation to the alleged harm to the personal integrity of the direct family of Vladimir Herzog based directly on his torture and murder. Consequently, the said juris tantum presumption cannot be recognized in this case. The Court will therefore have to analyze the testimonial and expert evidence provided to this litigation in order to prove the alleged harm. 354. From the body of evidence, 395 the Court finds that the existence and dissemination of a false version of the detention, torture and execution of Vladimir Herzog harmed the integrity of all the members of his family. In addition, the unsuccessful efforts of the family to obtain judicial recognition of their rights caused them anguish and uncertainty, as well as frustration and suffering. In the Court’s opinion, this also constituted harm to their mental and moral integrity. 355. In addition, the lack of investigation into the death of their husband and father violated the mental and moral integrity of Vladimir Herzog’s wife and children, resulting in extreme anguish and uncertainty, as well as frustration and suffering that subsists to this day. The failure to identify and punish those responsible has meant that the anguish has continued for years, without the victims feeling protected or obtaining reparation. 396 356. The Court also notes that even though the State presented some legal arguments on this point, it failed to provide any evidence or arguments that sought to disprove the evidence submitted by the representatives. 357. In view of the foregoing, the Court finds it proved that, as a result of the lack of the truth, and the failure to investigate, prosecute and punish those responsible for the torture and murder of Vladimir Herzog, the victim’s direct family have endured profound suffering and anguish to the detriment of their mental and moral integrity. 390 Cf. Case of La Cantuta v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 29, 2006. Series C No. 162, para. 218, and Case of Cruz Sánchez et al. v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of April 17, 2015. Series C No. 292, para. 444. Cf. Case of Espinoza Gonzáles v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2014. Series C No. 289, para. 297. 391 392 Case of Ruano Torres et al. v. El Salvador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of October 5, 2015. Series C No. 303, para. 177. Cf. Case of Valle Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2008. Series C No. 192, para. 119, and Case of Vereda La Esperanza v. Colombia, para. 249. 393 394 Case of Valle Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia, para. 119, and Case of Vereda La Esperanza v. Colombia, para. 249. Statement by Ivo Herzog (evidence file, folios 14036 to 14045); Statement by André Herzog (evidence file, folios 14575 to 14583); Statement by Clarice Herzog during the hearing and expert opinion of Ana C. Deutsch (evidence file, folio 14183 to14913). 395 396 Statement by Ivo Herzog (evidence file, folios 14036 to 14045); Statement by André Herzog (evidence file, folio 14575 to 14583); Statement by Clarice Herzog during the hearing and expert opinion of Ana C. Deutsch (evidence file, folio 14183 to 14913). 91