48 167. Esmeralda Herrera Monreal was 15 years old and had completed “third year of secondary school.”174 She disappeared on Monday, October 29, 2001, after leaving the house where she worked as a domestic employee.175 168. According to the representatives, the three young women, Ramos, González and Herrera, were of “humble origins.” 2.2. The first 72 hours 169. There are inconsistencies between the allegations of the Commission and the representatives on this point, because at times they indicate that the authorities told the next of kin that they must wait 72 hours in relation to one or two victims and, at other times, they indicate that it was in relation to all three victims. Furthermore, some allegations indicate that the report was not filed until 72 hours had passed, and others that the investigations were only started after 72 hours. 170. The State contested the foregoing and indicated that “this allegation has not been proved and is incorrect,” because “the reports of the disappearances of the young women were drawn up when their next of kin came forward to denounce them.” In addition, the State indicated, in general and without mentioning specific dates, that “the authorities […] ordered an immediate search to find the missing women,” “based on the information provided by the next of kin.” 171. The Court observes that Laura Berenice Ramos disappeared on September 22, 2001, and, according to the Commission and the representatives, her mother filed a complaint before the authorities on September 25; this was not contested by the State. The disappearance report was drawn up the same day. 172. Claudia Ivette González disappeared on October 10, 2001. The representatives alleged that her next of kin and close friends informed the authorities on October 11.176 The Commission and the State indicated that the disappearance was reported on October 12. The date of the Missing Person Report is October 12, 2001.177 173. Esmeralda Herrera disappeared on October 29, 2001. The following day, a complaint was filed,178 and the disappearance report is dated the same day.179 174. Except in the case of the mother of Claudia Ivette González, there is no evidence in the case file that the next of kin had approached the authorities before the date indicated above as the day on which the disappearance was reported. Neither the Commission nor the representatives contradicted the validity of the disappearance records provided by the State. Consequently, the Tribunal concludes that the missing person reports were drawn up on the same day that the disappearance were reported 174 Appearance of Irma Monreal Jaime before an official of the Public Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Office of the Special Prosecutor to Investigate Murders of Women and Disappearances of Persons on October 30, 2001 (case file of attachments to the application, volume VIII, attachment 29, folio 2653). 175 Cf. appearance of Irma Monreal Jaime, supra note 174; Missing Person Report No. 241/2001, processed on October 30, 2001, with regard to Esmeralda Herrera Monreal (case file of attachments to the application, volume VIII, attachment 13, folio 2613), and testimony given by Mrs. Monreal at the public hearing held before the Inter-American Court on April 28, 2009. 176 Cf. appearance of Mayela Banda Gonzáles, supra note 173, folio 2605. 177 Cf. Missing Person Report No. 234/2001, supra note 172. 178 Cf. testimony given, on April 5, 2006, by Irma Monreal Jaime before the Joint Agency to Investigate the Murders of Women (case file of attachments to the answer to the application, volume XXVIII, attachment 38, folio 9555), and appearance of Irma Monreal Jaime, supra note 174. 179 Cf. Missing Person Report No. 241/2001, supra note 175.