60 . 225. The Court considers that based on the body of evidence it is possible to have as proven that some individuals hindered the journalistic activity of the reporter Erika Paz and the cameraman Samuel Sotomayor, although it has not been proven that the physical integrity of either of them was affected. * * * 226. The Commission held that other journalists suffered verbal attacks on several occasions, for example, on December 8, 2002 in detriment of Anahís Cruz and Herbigio Henríquez.231 227. Regarding the alleged verbal attacks against Anahís Cruz and Herbigio Henríquez, there is only the sworn statement of Mrs. Cruz, in which she mentions that individuals identified as members of the so-called “Bolivarian Circles” insulted and threatened them, and that “different police bodies and from the National Guard [did] nothing to stop the attacks.”232 228. Regarding these facts, the State indicated that several actions were carried out, 233 among others, interviews to witnesses and a visual inspection. It mentioned that on October 21, 2008 the 9° Section of the Public Prosecutors’ Office of the Judicial District of the State of Aragua had required the discontinuance of the case, by virtue of the lack of a criminal definition of the facts object of investigation and they would wait for the judicial ruling.234 229. The Court considers that sufficient elements have not been provided to consider the alleged fact as proven, or any other evidence that verifies the statement of the alleged victim. * * * 230. The Commission argued that on January 27, 2003 Mrs. Anahís Cruz suffered a verbal attack at a press conference by an Army Division General at the headquarters of the Paramaconi Barracks in Maracay, State of Aragua, who ordered that the mentioned journalist be taken out of the press conference and her entrance be prevented since “he did not offer statements to rebels.” The State, on its part, argued that the journalist Anahís Cruz was never removed from the press conference nor was she prevented from entering; that the statement of Mrs. Cruz is full of contradictions, imprecisions, referential accounts, and opinions, which do not permit her statements to be credible. 231. The statements of Mrs. Cruz coincide with the version of the facts offered by the Commission.235 In the video presented by the representatives, an interview with a high- 231 The Commission argued in its application that, “on December 8, 2002 when Anahís Cruz and Herbigio Henríquez were verbally attacked by individuals while they were covering a strike at the transportation company ‘Tomas Quiara’”. 232 Cf. statement offered by Anahís del Carmen Cruz Finol before notary public (affidavit) on June 27, 2008 (dossier of evidence, volume XVIII, folios 5671-5677). 233 234 Cf. final arguments of the State (dossier of merits, volume VIII, folios 2690-2691). Cf. Report n˚DFGR-VFGR-DGAP-DPDF-08-PRO-66-10603-08 of October 23, 2008 (dossier of evidence, volume XXVI, folio 9246). 235 Cf. statement of Anahís Cruz (dossier of evidence, volume VIII, appendix 31 to the brief of pleadings, motions, and evidence, folios 3130-3135) and statement offered by Anahís del Carmen Cruz Finol before notary public (affidavit) on June 27, 2008 (dossier of evidence, volume XVIII, folios 5671-5677).