the State must provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation for that situation. 490 Consequently, a presumption exists that the State is responsible for the injuries revealed by a persons who has been in the custody of State agents. 491 In this situation, the State has the obligation to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation of what happened and to disprove the allegations of its responsibility, using adequate probative elements. 492 344. On other occasions, this Court has stipulated the guiding principles that must be observed in criminal investigations into human rights violations. 493 In cases of violence against women, certain international instruments are useful for clarifying and giving content to the enhanced State obligation to investigate such cases with due diligence. 494 Among other matters, a criminal investigation into sexual violence requires that: (i) the victim’s statement is taken in a safe and comfortable location, that provides privacy and confidence: (ii) the victim’s statement is recorded in such a way as to avoid or limit the need to repeat it; (iii) the victim is provided with medical, psychological and health care, on an emergency basis and continuously if this is required, by a treatment protocol designed to reduce the consequences of the rape; (iv) a complete medical and psychological examination is performed immediately by appropriate trained personnel, of the sex indicated by the victim, insofar as possible, informing her that she may be accompanied by a person of her confidence if she so wishes; (v) the investigative actions are documented and coordinated and the evidence is handled diligently, taking sufficient samples, conducting tests to determine the possible authorship of the act, securing other evidence such as the victim’s clothes, investigating promptly the site of the facts, and ensuring the proper chain of custody, and (vi) access to free legal assistance is provided to the victim during all stages of the proceedings. 345. In the instant case, the presumed victim gave an account of the alleged ill-treatment for the first time on April 21, 1992, in her initial statement before the State authorities, which, in this case, were the Police themselves. Subsequently, she again mentioned these facts in her preliminary statement (supra paras. 82, 83 and 322). The Court underscores that, due to the above considerations, the awareness of the alleged ill-treatment suffered by Ms. J., gave rise to the State’s obligation to open an investigation into the facts ex officio. Nevertheless, according to the State itself, it has not yet undertaken any investigation. The State presented diverse justifications for why it had not opened an investigation and the Court will now examine them. 346. The State’s first justification was that the statements made by Ms. J. were “fairly general,” so that the domestic authorities had not identified “a specific situation that was contrary [to the right to personal integrity] and that could be identified as an act of torture in order to conduct an investigation (supra para. 301). The State also indicated, as a second justification, that, at the time of the events, it had no international obligation to investigate alleged “inappropriate touching,” and that a mention of alleged “inappropriate touching” did not constitute “a reasonable indication that 490 Cf. Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez v. Honduras, supra, para. 100, and Case of Mendoza et al. v. Argentina, supra, para. 203. 491 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits, supra, paras. 95 and 170, and Case of Mendoza et al. v. Argentina, supra, para. 203. 492 Cf. Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez v. Honduras, supra, para. 111, and Case of Mendoza et al. v. Argentina, supra, para. 203. 493 These may include, inter alia: collection and preservation of probative elements in order to assist in any potential criminal investigation of those responsible; identification of possible witnesses and obtaining their statements, and determination of the cause, manner, place and time of the act investigated. In addition, an exhaustive investigation of the scene of the crime must be conducted ensuring that thorough analyses are performed by competent professionals, using the most appropriate procedures. Cf. Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez v. Honduras, supra, para. 128, and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 178. 494 Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 194, and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 178. Istanbul Protocol, paras. 67, 77, 89, 99, 101 to 105, 154, 161 a 163, 170, 171, 224, 225, 260, 269 and 290, and World Health Organizations, Guidelines for medico-legal care for victims of sexual violence, Geneva, 2003, inter alia, pp. 17, 30, 31, 34, 39 to 44 and 57 to 74. 102