Seeking Remedies for Torture Victims: A Handbook on the Individual Complaints Procedures of the UN Tready Bodies In many instances, a torture victim will not be able to supply all of the above information. For example, the victim might be highly disoriented at the time of the torture, and may not remember some of the details and circumstances surrounding the facts. Nevertheless, it is advisable to record as many details as possible. It is worth referring to the findings of the CAT Committee in V.L. v. Switzerland (see also Section 4.6) for an explanation setting out some of the difficulties and challenges torture victims may face, which in turn may have detrimental effects in relation to the accuracy and thoroughness of the information and evidence provided when pursuing remedies: The State party has argued that the complainant is not credible because the allegations of sexual abuse and the medical report supporting these allegations were submitted late in the domestic proceedings. The Committee finds, to the contrary, that the complainant's allegations are credible. The complainant’s explanation of the delay in mentioning the rapes to the national authorities is totally reasonable. It is well-known that the loss of privacy and prospect of humiliation based on revelation alone of the acts concerned may cause both women and men to withhold the fact that they have been subject to rape and/or other forms of sexual abuse until it appears absolutely necessary. Particularly for women, there is the additional fear of shaming and rejection by their partner or family members. Here the complainant’s allegation that her husband reacted to the complainant’s admission of rape by humiliating her and forbidding her to mention it in their asylum proceedings adds credibility to her claim. The Committee notes that as soon as her husband left her, the complainant who was then freed from his influence immediately mentioned the rapes to the national authorities in her request for revision of 11 October 2004. Further evidence of her psychological state or psychological “obstacles”, as called for by the State party, is unnecessary. The State party’s assertion that the complainant should have raised and substantiated the issue of sexual abuse earlier in the revision proceedings is insufficient basis upon which to find that her allegations of sexual abuse lack credibility, particularly in view of the fact that she was not represented in the proceedings.256 In its General Comment No. 1, the CAT Committee outlined, at paragraph 8, the different types of information that help a person establish a violation of Article 3 of the CAT, that is that his or her deportation to another State would expose him or her to torture by that State. Applicants seeking Article 3 non-refoulement protection should therefore look carefully at 256 CAT Committee, V.L. v. Switzerland, Comm. No. 262/2005, para. 8.8. 86