103 many young girls are still disappeared […]. I no longer have any confidence in them […]. I have daughters, and I am afraid that it could happen again because the authorities are doing nothing […]. In order to get information from them […] we used to go every day and […] sometimes […] the doors were closed and they did not receive us; the journalists were the ones that gave us strength. […] They conducted a DNA test on my daughter and me a first time, and then three months later, they came to do another DNA test. Once again they sent it from Mexico and I said to them: “you had already done one, where is it?” [They answered] “No madam it was lost, it was spoiled” […]. The most difficult thing is the feeling of helplessness; [I need] courage for my other children, I don’t want this to happen to me again.425 419. The body of evidence reveals that, following the disappearance of the three victims, their next of kin had to take different measures to look for them due to the inactivity of the authorities, who also made derogatory comments about the young women, causing suffering to their next of kin. Thus, the expert reports indicated that the opinions given by the authorities, to the effect that the young women were to blame for their disappearance owing to their behavior, “caused the next of kin confusion and anguish, especially for those who knew that their daughter’s life did not correspond to these descriptions.”426 Furthermore, “[t]he mothers insist in the pain and suffering experienced owing to the negligence of the authorities and the callousness with which they have been treated, underscoring […] how their anguish was aggravated by this mistreatment, and by being dissuaded from filing complaints that would perhaps have allowed [the victims] to be found alive and by the absence of information during the whole process.” 427 420. In addition, the mental and emotional health of the next of kin suffered owing to the lack of diligence in determining the identity of the remains that were found and the absence of information on the measures taken by the authorities. Thus, “[t]he failure to identify the bodies [during several years] has prevented the families from going through the rites that accompany the death and burial of a loved one, brusquely altering their mourning process. They have been unable to heal their wounds, obliged to live with a permanent anguish that is revived each time the media announces the discovery of more bodies.”428 421. The absence of investigations to try and discover the truth, to prosecute and, if applicable, to punish those responsible, “exacerbates the feeling of helplessness, lack of protection and defenselessness of these families.”429 422. The State acknowledged that “the irregularities admitted by the authorities at the beginning of the investigations into the [three] murders […] affected the next of kin directly […]. Consequently, the State acknowledges and accepts that the right to mental and moral integrity of the next of kin was violated.” 423. The State defined the scope of its acquiescence as follows: (i) When the bodies […] were found, the authorities did not take sufficient care to safeguard the scene of the facts and the other elements that were found there, elements that constitute material evidence of the murders. This 425 Cf. testimony of Mrs. González, supra note 183. 426 Cf. statement made before notary public by expert witness Lira Kornfeld on April 21, 2009 (merits case file, volume XI, folio 3340). 427 Cf. testimony of expert witness Lira Kornfeld, supra note 426, folio 3340. 428 Cf. Amnesty International, Intolerable killings, supra note 64, folio 2282. Likewise, IACHR, The Situation of the Rights of Women in Ciudad Juárez, supra note 64, folio 1745. 429 Cf. testimony of expert witness Lira Kornfeld, supra note 426, folio 3339.