45 omissions of the State authorities with regard to the events.203 Following this line of jurisprudence, the Court has found that the next of kin’s right to mental and moral integrity, protected under Article 5(1) of the American Convention, was violated.204 In the present case, the irregularities and delays on the part of the Guatemalan State in the investigation into the disappearance of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz and her subsequent murder caused her family profound suffering and anguish, and that despite the seriousness of the crimes, seven years have passed since her lifeless body was found and yet those responsible have not been punished.205 173. The IACHR notes that the continuous changes of prosecutors in charge of the case has also been a source of victimization of the family, which has had to repeat the facts in the case countless times with the attendant pain and emotional suffering that has caused. In the words of Mr. Velásquez, “Basically they did not ask us any questions. They asked me to narrate the facts and I was hurried by the assistant prosecutor, so that we should not take up so much of his time.”206 174. According to the Human Rights Ombudsman, the Velásquez family has had to put up not only with indifference, but also offensive comments: for example, that the victim’s profile had been confused because of certain characteristics, such as that she was wearing sandals or had a pierced navel. In its report, the ombudsman’s office found that on a number of occasions Rolando Velásquez was denied access to information in the case file, while on others he was asked to give the investigations time to move forward. However, he says that whenever he stops going to the Public Prosecution Service’s offices the investigations halt. In a hearing on the merits of the case before the IACHR, the petitioners said that Jorge Rolando Velásquez Durán has been categorized within the justice system as “persona non grata in prosecutors’ offices.”207 175. The Commission also notes the scant concern and sensitivity that State officials showed for the family’s grief. An example of this was the arrival of officials from the Public Prosecution Service to fingerprint the corpse at the wake that the family was holding for the alleged victim,208 with “the 203 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Massacre of Pueblo Bello v. Colombia. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, par. 154; I/A Court H.R., Case of Gómez Palomino. Judgment of November 22, 2005. Series C No. 136, par. 60; I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre” v. Colombia. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 134, pars 144-146; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters. Judgment of March 1, 2005. Series C No. 120, pars 113-114; I/A Court H.R., Case of the 19 Merchants. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109, par. 210. 204 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Massacre of Pueblo Bello v. Colombia. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, par. 154; I/A Court H.R., Case of Gómez Palomino. Judgment of November 22, 2005. Series C No. 136, par. 60; I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre” v. Colombia. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 134, pars 144-146; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters. Judgment of March 1, 2005. Series C No. 120, pars 113-114; I/A Court H.R., Case of the 19 Merchants. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109, par. 210. 205 Appendix 36. Psychological experts’ reports submitted by the petitioners 206 Appendix 37. Andrea Diez Informe sobre las condiciones y condicionantes de género presentes en la sociedad guatemalteca y en cultura judicial y estatal. El caso de Claudina Velásquez Paiz [Report on gender conditions and constraints in Guatemalan society and in the judicial and state culture: The case of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz] October 2009. Enclosed with the original petition of December 10, 2007, and attached to the communication of March 19, 2010. 207 208 IACHR, Record of Hearing No. 30, Case 12.777, Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz, March 27, 2012. Appendix 13. Report No. 2242-2005 Group 11 of August 16, 2005. Report of Marta Yolanda Samayoa López, criminalistic investigations technician, addressed to the Public Prosecution Service Fingerprint Section. Enclosed with the original petition of December 10, 2007.