because of the specific situation in which he finds himself. 227 Similarly, in the case of those who have been deprived of their liberty, the State is in a special position of guarantor, since the prison authorities exercise a strong control or dominion over the persons in their custody. 228 204. Thus, it has been established that whenever a person is deprived of liberty in a normal state of health and subsequently appears with health problems, it is incumbent upon the State to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation of this situation and to refute the allegations of its responsibility though adequate evidence. The Court considers that the lack of an explanation leads to the presumption of State responsibility for such injuries. 229 205. At this point, it should be recalled that since his first statements in 2002, Reyes Alpízar Ortiz denounced that he had been subjected to severe mistreatment to obtain his confession of his alleged participation in the murder of María de los Ángeles Tamés Pérez. Also, before this Court, he stated that: […] when they took me to the Deputy District Attorney’s Office they tied my hands, they threw me on the floor, they kicked me and poured water in my mouth and nose, they hit me with their fists all over my body, they made me feel like a blender (they moved my head around in circles and pulled my hair), they kept asking me where Jaime was (the person they said fired the gun against the mayor). I couldn’t answer because they stuffed my mouth with sanitary towels. They had me tied by the hands, and began to wrap my body and eyes and only left my nose and mouth uncovered, and kept asking me where Jaime was. I couldn’t speak, they punched me in the stomach to take the air out of me and at the same time poured water in my mouth. […] They also beat me like a cazuelita and with their hands, cupped in the shape of a shell - on my ears and my eyes, also with the cattle prod - they put it everywhere and gave me shocks- and when the current ran out they kicked me, and more blows […] I experienced a sensation of separation from my body, I urinated and defecated, I saw my body from outside while they were hitting me. They stamped on me, kicked me, as if I were an animal, and pulled my arms up a lot so I could catch my breath and they could keep beating me. 230 206. With regard to the medical or psychological examinations performed on Reyes Alpízar, this Court notes the following: a) on October 25, 2002, he was examined for the first time after his arrest. On that occasion, a number of injuries and bruises were found, “which by their nature are not life-threatening, take less than fifteen days to heal, and do not require hospitalization” (supra para. 90); b) the same conclusions were reached in the medical examination performed on October 26, 2002; c) on October 28, 2002, he underwent three medical examinations. The first of these revealed several “non-recent” injuries, but others were also found that were not recorded in previous examinations. However, the third medical examination carried out that day by a different physician, emphasized that the injuries referred to were not recent; d) on October 30, 2002, another medical examination was performed, which also revealed injuries not previously reported; 227 Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, para. 111; Case of Díaz Peña v. Venezuela. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 26, 2012. Series C No. 244, para. 137, and Case of Guevara Díaz v. Costa Rica, supra, para. 53. 228 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al. v. Peru. Merits, supra, para. 60; Case of Vélez Loor v. Panama. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 23, 2010. Series C No. 218, para. 198; Case of López et al. v. Argentina. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 25, 2019. Series C No. 396, para. 23, and Case of Guachalá Chimbo et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 26, 2021. Series C No. 423, para. 90. 229 Cf. Case of Isaza Uribe v. Colombia. Merits, supra, para. 88; and Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez v. Honduras. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 7, 2003. Series C No. 99, paras. 100 and 111, and Case of Mendoza et al. v. Argentina. Preliminary objections, merits and reparations. Judgment of May 14, 2013 Series C No. 260, para. 203. 230 Affidavit rendered by Reyes Alpízar Ortiz (merits file, folios 993 et seq.). -54-