57 reliable determination of the existence of the harm, especially when there are no witnesses other than the perpetrators and the victims themselves and, consequently, probative elements may be very limited. This reveals that, for an investigation into acts or torture to be effective, this must be conducted promptly. 245 Therefore, failure to perform a medical examination of a person who is in the State’s custody, or performing this without meeting the applicable standards, cannot be used to question the veracity of the presumed victim’s allegations of illtreatment. 246 Also, the absence of physical signs does not mean that ill-treatment has not occurred, because such acts of violence against the individual frequently do not leave permanent marks or scars. 247 153. Likewise, in cases in which sexual violence is alleged, the lack of medical evidence does not decrease the truth of the presumed victim’s statement. 248 In such cases, a medical examination will not necessarily reveal the occurrence of violence or rape, because not all cases of violence and/or rape cause physical injuries or ailments that can be verified by such examinations. 249 154. The Court will analyze the characteristics of the statements that should be collected and the examinations that should be performed once the State became aware that someone has been subjected to acts of torture and/or sexual violence in Chapter VIII.4 on the alleged violation of the right to judicial guarantees and judicial protection to the detriment of Gladys Espinoza. However, as mentioned supra, in this chapter, the Court will assess the medical and psychological testimony and appraisals in the case file in order to determine what happened to the presumed victim. B.2.1. The Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (CVR) 155. In the chapter on “The torture and murder of Rafael Salgado Castilla (1992),” of its Final Report, the CVR affirms that Ms. Espinoza and Mr. Salgado were “[…] intercepted by agents of the [DIVISE], who had mounted an operation called ‘Oriente’ in order to find those who had abducted the businessman, Antonio Furukawa Obara, […].” The report added that “[a]t the time of the intervention, Rafael Salgado Castilla was riding a motorcycle with Glad[y]s Espinoza Gonzáles on the back seat. At the corner of block 21 of Avenida Brazil (Ovalo Brasil), they stopped at a red traffic light and owing to the presence of two police agents who were directing the traffic, at which time they were intercepted by two armed police agents in civilian clothing, who obliged them to abandon the motorcycle. The version of the police agents in charge of 245 Cf. Case of Bueno Alves v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 164, para. 111, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 333. In this regard the Istanbul Protocol establishes that “[t]he timeliness of such medical examination is particularly important. A medical examination should be undertaken regardless of the length of time since the torture, but if it is alleged to have happened within the past six weeks, such an examination should be arranged urgently before acute signs fade.” Istanbul Protocol, supra, para. 104. 246 Cf. Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 333. Similarly, see EHCR, Tekín v. Turkey, No. 41556/98, Judgment of 9 June 1998, para. 41, Türkan v. Turkey, No. 33086/04, Judgment of 18 September 2008, para. 43, and Korobov v. Ukraine, No. 39598/03, Judgment of 21 July 2011, para. 68. 247 Cf. Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 329, and Istanbul Protocol, supra, para. 161. 248 Cf. Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 333, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, The Prosecutor v. JeanPaul Akayesu, Judgment of 2 September 1998, case No. ICTR-96-4-T, paras. 134 and 135; International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, The Prosecutor v. Anto Furundzija, Judgment of 10 December 1998, case No. IT95-17/1-T, para. 271; International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, The Prosecutor v. Tadić, Appeal Judgment of 15 July 1999, case No. IT-94-1-A, para. 65; International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, The Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalic, Zdravko Mucic, Hazim Delic and Esad Landzo (“Celebici camp”), Appeal Judgment of 20 February 2001, case No. IT-96-21, paras. 504 and 505. Similarly, article 96 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda establish that “in cases of sexual assault, no corroboration of the victim’s testimony shall be required.” 249 Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 124, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 329. See also, EHCR, M.C. v. Bulgaria, No. 39272/98, Judgment of 4 December 2003, para. 166.