- 97 - evidence, and (vi) the victim should be provided with access to free legal assistance at all stages of the proceedings.363 273. Regarding the interview with a person who states that they have been subjected to acts of torture, the Court has indicated that: (i) the person should be allowed to describe freely what he or she considers relevant, (ii) no one should be required to talk about any form of torture if they feel uncomfortable doing so; (iii) during the interview, the presumed victim’s pre-arrest psychosocial history should be documented; and also a summary of the facts relating to the time and circumstances of the initial detention, the place and conditions of detention while in State custody, and the methods of ill-treatment and torture presumably suffered, and (iv) the detailed statement should be recorded and transcribed.364 In addition, the interview with a presumed victim of acts of violence or rape should be carried out in a comfortable and safe environment, that offers privacy and inspires confidence, and should be recorded in order to avoid or limit the need to repeat it.365 274. In this regard, the Court notes that, when they were brought before the Public Prosecution Service to make a statement, several of the women tried to report the facts. However, the authorities not only refused to let them describe freely what they considered relevant, but refused to document the facts recounted by the women regarding the torture and sexual violence they had suffered.366 The Court also notes that the statements were made in the prison’s dining hall, in front of many other detainees, some of whom the victims knew; and, when taken to see the medical personnel, in many cases they were examined in the presence of other detainees, in an environment that was neither comfortable or safe, and did not offer privacy or inspire trust. 275. Furthermore, the Court considers that, in cases where there are indications of torture, the medical examination of the presumed victim should be performed with their prior and informed consent, without the presence of law enforcement or other State agents. Also, on becoming aware of acts of violence against a woman, a complete and detailed medical and psychological examination should be performed immediately by appropriate trained personnel, of the sex preferred by the victim insofar as this is possible, and the victim should be advised that she may be accompanied by a person of confidence if she so wishes. This examination should be performed in accordance with protocols specifically designed to document evidence in cases of gender-based violence.367 In addition, the doctors and other health care personnel have the Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 30, 2010. Series C No. 215, para. 194, and Case of V.R.P., V.P.C. et al. v. Nicaragua. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 8, 2018. Series C No. 350, para. 154. 363 Cf. UN, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Istanbul Protocol (Manual on the Effective Investigation and. Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment), New York and Geneva, 2004, paras. 100 and 135 to 141, and Case of Espinoza Gonzáles v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2014. Series C No. 289, para. 248. 364 Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 30, 2010. Series C No. 215 para. 194, and Case of Espinoza Gonzáles v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2014. Series C No. 289, para. 249. 365 In fact, the Court notes that the authorities told them that they were not there to file complaints, but rather to make a statement with regard to the offenses of which they were accused, or that they would have to file the complaint on their release from prison, and they were even expressly ordered not to include that information in their statement (supra para. 105). Similarly, the SCJN concluded that, even though “some of the women who said that they had been sexually assaulted indicated this in their initial statement […] this did not lead to prompt inquiries or verification.” SCJN judgment of February 12, 2009 (evidence file, folio 30922). 366 In this regard, the Court has stipulated that the corresponding reports should include, at least: (a) The circumstances of the interview. The name of the subject and name and affiliation of those present at the examination; the exact time and date, location, nature and address of the institution (including, where appropriate, the room) where the 367