53. The Court notes that the dispute centers on the way in which the said detention was carried out, the reasons for it, and what happened at the Police Station. The representatives and the Commission argue that the presumed victim was detained by state agents in an unlawful, arbitrary and discriminatory manner. They also allege that she was subjected to serious acts of physical and mental violence, including rape, using particular brutality, owing to the identification or perception of Azul as a gay man at that time. Meanwhile, the State bases its defense on the argument that the presumed victim was detained for identification purposes, which is permitted by Peruvian law. In addition, it argued that it is the prerogative of the State to classify the facts and the prosecutor considered that they did not constitute torture pursuant to the legal definition of that crime at the time of the facts. 54. The Court will examine the different versions of what happened below in order to determine which of the alleged violations it considers have been proved (infra paras. 145 to 157). C. Investigation of the facts 55. According to the presumed victim, on February 25, 2008, she tried to report what had happened at the Casa Grande Police Station, but her complaint was not received.55 The state agents deny that the presumed victim went to the Police Station to file a complaint on February 25.56 That same day, she reported the facts to the media. 57 56. On February 27, 2008, Azul Rojas Marín filed a complaint with the police station of the Peruvian National Police in Casa Grande, describing the acts of violence to which she had been subjected at the time of her detention.58 At that time, Azul Rojas Marín identified three agents of the National Police and one agent of the serenazgo who had attacked her.59 Azul Rojas Marín made a second statement about the facts on February 28, 2008, ratifying her previous description and adding that she was raped while she was detained.60 In her first statement, the presumed victim indicated that a police agent had refused to receive it because “the major had told him that he could not receive the complaint at the police station.” Subsequently, when expanding her statement, she indicated that it was not received “because the major was not there.” Cf. Statement made by Azul Rojas Marín before the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service of Ascope on February 28, 2008 (evidence file, folios 2811 and 2812), and Statement made by Azul Rojas Marín before the investigating officer on March 6, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2213). 55 In particular, the police major denied that he had given an order not to receive the presumed victim’s complaint. DPP, another police agent, indicated that he was unaware of whether the presumed victim had filed a complaint, “but if she had, the agent on duty would have informed me that she wanted to file a complaint because I am in charge of investigations.” Lastly, the police agent who had supposedly refused to receive the complaint indicated that Ms. Rojas Marín did not go to the Police State to file a complaint on either February 25 or 26, 2008. He also maintained that it was false that he told her that he would not receive the complaint. Cf. Statement by the major of the Peruvian National Police before the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service of Ascope on April 18, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2785); Statement by DPP of March 8, 2008 (evidence file, folio 42), and Statement by JVP of April 22, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2781). 56 Cf. Statement by an employee of Radio Ozono (evidence file, folio 2829); Statement by an employee of Cable Times channel (evidence file, folio 2915), and Press release published in the newspaper “Nuevo Norte” on February 27, 2008, entitled “Denuncia a serenazgo y a Policía por abuso de autoridad” [Serenazgo and police accused of abuse of authority] (evidence file, folio 2788). 57 58 Cf. Oral report by Azul Rojas Marín on February 27, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2793). The Court will use the initials LQC, JLM and DPP to refer to the police agents identified in the complaint and the initials FFR to refer to the serenazgo agent. Cf. Identification procedure of February 27, 2008 (evidence file, folio 54). 59 Cf. Statement made by Azul Rojas Marín before the Second Provincial Corporate Criminal Prosecution Service of Ascope on February 28, 2008 (evidence file, folio 2811). 60 16