61 208. The video of the facts provided by the Commission shows that a woman with a stick prevented Mrs. Villalba from conducting an interview; then, it is possible to hear some kind of blow onto the microphone and that a police officer escorted Mrs. Villalba outside the place while many of the people were shouting at the alleged victims, telling them to leave and were separated by the police officer186. 209. The Court notes that the complaint was lodged six months after the incidents, for alleged physical attack committed against Mrs. Villalba. Even though the State did not furnished evidence of the proceedings conducted, it mentioned that several testimonies were obtained and that on May 26, 2008 the Public Prosecutor requested the Department of Audiovisual Analysis and Spectography of the Scientific, Criminal and Forensic Investigation Division to conduct a matching and technical coherence examination of the video furnished by the representatives of Globovisión. Besides, the Court notes an unwarranted procedural delay on the part of the Attorney General's Office given the fact that the first proceeding was carried out more than four years after the opening of the investigation. 210. As from the analysis of the evidence available, the Court considers as proven that an unidentified woman prevented Mrs. Villalba from interviewing another person in Llaguno Bridge, though there is no record that she was beaten. Besides, the police who was looking after the news team prevented the reporter from being attacked. There is no evidence proving that the integrity of Mrs. Villalba was damaged. * * * 211. The Commission pointed out that on September 21, 2002 reporter Rossana Rodríguez Gudiño, cameraman Felipe Lupo Durán and assistant Wilmer Escalona Arnal were surrounded by a group of individuals who threatened them and damaged their vehicle while forcing them to abandon it. The vehicle was stolen and later on, returned187 regarding this fact, the representatives pointed out that the stolen equipment included a camera, microphones, a tripod and a radio communications apparatus and that no police officer showed up at the scene and prevented the incidents from happening. The State pointed out that the complaint regarding this fact was lodged five months and sixteen days after the incident, but the investigation was conducted ex officio for alleged damage caused to the vehicle of Globovisión. 212. Regarding these facts, Mr. Felipe Lugo Durán further declared that the attackers took possession of the video tape that was in the camera, a radio apparatus and the battery of the camera. Similarly, he referred to Mr. Wilmer Escalona Arnal in his affidavits as well as in other testimonies188. Municipal Court of the Judicial District of Caracas Metropolitan Area containing the statement of Ana Karina Villalba (Records of evidence, volume IV, p. 912) 186 Cf. video (appendix 3 to the application) 187 The Commission pointed out in the application that “On September 21, 2002, when reporter Rossana Rodríguez Gudiño, 47 cameraman Felipe Lugo Durán, and assistant Wilmer Escalona Arnal were in a Globovisión vehicle on their way to cover a story in central Caracas, the vehicle was surrounded by a group of individuals armed with bottles, one of whom also had a firearm. They struck the vehicle, broke its windows, and forced the Globovisión employees to get out and surrender their equipment. They then took the car to a nearby location before returning it, now damaged, to the media workers; the reporters were then able to leave, without having covered the story, thanks to the intervention of a ruling party official The assailants kept a videotape and some of the equipment they had seized, and they threatened the reporters that if they didn’t leave, “they would be burned.