49 in the cases of Esmeralda Herrera and Laura Berenice Ramos, while in the case of Claudia Ivette González, the Court has insufficient evidence to determine whether the next of kin first approached the authorities on October 11 or 12; nevertheless, in any case, 72 hours did not elapse between the moment the next of kin approached the authorities and the time the missing person report was drawn up. 175. Regarding the alleged delay of 72 hours to open the investigation, the Court finds that, in all three cases, the same day that the “Missing Person Report” was drawn up,180 the Program to provide Services to Victims of Crime (Programa de Atención a víctimas de Delitos) sent an official letter to the Head of the Judicial Police.181 The purpose of these official letters was to indicate that the Program had been informed of the disappearances of the three victims and to ask the Judicial Police to conduct “investigations to try and clarify the facts.”182 176. During the public hearing before the Tribunal, the mothers of the three victims stated that, during the first contact with the authorities, they were told that they should allow 72 hours to pass before considering that their daughters had disappeared;183 this was reiterated in other statements.184 177. According to the representatives, evidence of the delay in the start of the investigations could be found in the “103-F fact sheets (fichas)” of the 2003 special report of the CNDH. However, these fact sheets do not mention that the authorities made this type of affirmation.185 178. The opinions provided by the expert witnesses confirm that the mothers informed their respective psychiatrist or psychologist of the State’s supposed refusal to open a possible inquiry before 72 hours had passed.186 In addition, referring to all the Cotton Field disappearances, witness Delgadillo Pérez indicated that the investigations in “several files were not opened when the families reported them, but after 72 hours had passed,” mentioning the case of Esmeralda Herrera specifically, and concluding 180 Missing Person Report No. 225/2001, supra note 170, folio 2609; Missing Person Report No. 234/2001, supra note 172, and Missing Person Report No. 241/2001, supra note 175. 181 Cf. Official letter No. 549/2001 issued on September 25, 2001, by the Coordinator of the Program to provide services to Victims of Crime and Disappeared Persons in relation to the disappearance of Laura Berenice Ramos Monárrez (case file of attachments to the answer to the application, volume XXVIII, attachments 20 and 90, folio 9420); official letter No. 589/2001 issued on October 12, 2001, by the Coordinator of the Program to provide services to Victims of Crime in relation to the disappearance of Claudia Ivette González (case file of attachments to the application, volume VIII, attachment 10, folio 2607), and official letter No. 634/01 issued on October 30, 2001, by the Program to provide services to Victims of Crime in relation to the disappearance of Esmeralda Herrera Monreal (case file of attachments to the answer to the application, volume XXVIII, attachments 32 and 88, folio 9575). 182 Official letters Nos. 549/2001, 589/01 and 634/01, supra note 181. 183 Cf. testimonies given by Mrs. Monárrez, Mrs. González and Mrs. Monreal at the public hearing held before the Inter-American Court on April 28, 2009. 184 Cf. voluntary appearance of Irma Monreal Jaime before an official of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Joint Agency commissioned by the Federation to Investigate the Murders of Women, on October 20, 2003 (case file of attachments to the answer to the application, volume XXX, attachment 50, docket I, volume I, folio 10578); document presented to the IACHR by Josefina González and the Red Ciudadana de No Violencia and Dignidad Humana on September 3, 2006 (case file of attachments to the application, volume II, appendix 5, vol. I, folio 131), and document presented by Irma Monreal Jaime and the Asociación Nacional de Abogados Democráticos to the IACHR on July 29, 2005 (case file of attachments to the application, volume IV, appendix 5, vol. III, folio 734). 185 186 Cf. CNDH, Informe Especial, supra note 66, folios 2192 to 2220. Cf. Statement made before notary public by expert witness de la Peña Martínez on April 21, 2009 (merits case file, volume XI, folios 3350), and statement made before notary public by expert witness Azaola Garrido on April 20, 2009 (merits case file, volume XI, folios 3369).