48 193. The Court also recalls that the violation of the right to physical and psychological integrity of persons is a type of violation that has different connotations of degree and that ranges from torture to other types of abuse such as cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, with varying degrees of physical and psychological effects caused by endogenous and exogenous factors [..] which must be proven in each specific situation.187 In other words, the personal characteristics of an alleged victim of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment must be taken into account when determining a violation humane treatment, consequently increasing the suffering and sense of humiliation when they are subjected to certain treatments.188 The Court has also indicated that any use of force that is not strictly necessary due to the detainee's own behavior constitutes an attack on human dignity in violation of Article 5 of the American Convention.189 194. In the context of a forced disappearance, the Court has established that the victims of this practice have their personal integrity violated in all its dimensions, and that the submission of detainees to repressive official forces, state agents or private individuals who act with their acquiescence or tolerance, that practice torture and murder with impunity represents a violation of the duty to prevent violations of the rights to humane treatment and to life, even in the event that the acts of torture or deprivation of the person’s life cannot be proven in the specific case.190. In addition, this Court has held that forced disappearance violates the right to humane treatment because the mere fact of prolonged isolation and coercive solitary confinement represents cruel and inhuman treatment.191 195. In this case, the State acknowledged its international responsibility for the violation of Article 5(1) of the Convention as a constitutive part of the forced disappearance to the detriment of Mr. Omeara Miraval but argued that such recognition does not include its responsibility for the violation of Article 5(2) of the Convention for the alleged acts of torture to which he was allegedly subjected while he was disappeared. The Commission argued that the events that occurred during the time that Mr. Omeara Miraval was disappeared constituted acts of torture attributable to the State. The Court will now analyze the arguments regarding the responsibility of the State for the violation of Article 5(2) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, for the alleged acts of torture to which Mr. Omeara Miraval was allegedly subjected. 196. The Court notes that on September 23, 1994, the 19th Prosecutor's Office, together with a medical examiner, carried out an exhumation at the location where the body of Mr. Omeara Miraval was buried. The medical examiner reported that the body was found in “dorsal decubitus position, with the hands tied behind (his back) with thin black nylon” and that “[a]n external [e]xamination of the body revealed the high degree of decomposition and the lack of papillary ridges on the fingers” (supra para. 91). Similarly, the DAS officials who accompanied the exhumation of the alleged victim's body essentially concurred with the information from the 19th Prosecutor's Office. Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Merits, supra, para. 57, and Case of Coc Max et al. (Xamán Massacre) v. Guatemala, supra, para. 108. 188 Cf. Case of Ximenes Lopes v. Brazil, supra, para. 127, and Case of López Soto et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 185. 189 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru supra, para. 57, and Case of Favela Nova Brasília v. Brazil. Preliminary Exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 16, 2017. Series C No. 333, para. 251. 190 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras, supra, para. 175, and Case of Members of the Chichupac Village and neighboring communities of the Municipality of Rabinal v. Guatemala. Preliminary Exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 30, 2016. Series C No. 328. para. 158. 191 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra, paras. 156 and 187, and Case of Terrones Silva et al. v. Peru. Preliminary Exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 26, 2018. Series C No. 360. para. 172. 187