The defendant appealed his convictions for child sex abuse, involving assault, rape and buggery, saying that evidence of a recent complaint by a schoolgirl friend of the complainant which was not consistent with other evidence of the complainant should not have been admitted.
Held: Evidence of the mere fact of a complaint may only ever be admissible in very unusual circumstances and only then if a very careful direction is given: ‘admitting only evidence of the fact of the complaint would be to deny to a jury direct evidence as to the circumstances and nature of the contemporaneous complaint and to invite speculation’. In earlier cases, the court was dealing with complaints of recent abuse, not as here. Admissibility depends on established principles, on whether such evidence is sufficiently consistent to support or enhance the credibility of the complainant. Then it is for the jury, properly directed, to consider whether the evidence of the complaint supports the complainant’s evidence and what weight they consider should be attached to it in their assessment of the credit of the complainant. Nevertheless, the court had in this case failed to direct the jury as to the differences between the other complaint and the evidence of the complainant, and the conviction was unsafe.
Judges:
Mr Justice Holland Lord Justice Thomas His Honour Judge Michael Baker QC
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Crim 1320
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Lillyman CCCR 1896
Evidence of a contemporaneous complaint by the complainant to her employer was admitted against objections that such evidence ought not to be admitted and the evidence should be confined merely to the fact of the complaint. The evidence of the . .
Cited – Regina v Osborne CCCR 1905
The court considered the circumstances under which a court would hear evidence of a similar complaint against the defendant.
Ridley J said: ‘We think, however, if it were a question of the meaning of words, that the better construction of the . .
Cited – Regina v Camelleri 1922
The admissibility of evidence of a previous similar complaint against the defendant is not confined to cases where consent is the issue. . .
Cited – Regina v Wright and Ormerod CACD 1990
The defendants were charged with indecent assault on a child of 5, who said that the defendants had hurt her in the back and said naughty things to her. The Judge also admitted evidence from the child’s mother of the complaint the child had made to . .
Cited – Sparks v The Queen PC 4-Dec-1963
(Bermuda) A complaint by the alleged victim of a sexual offence is admissible at common law as hearsay only where the complainant gives evidence of the commission of the offence and only for the purpose of showing the consistency of the . .
Cited – White v The Queen PC 10-Aug-1998
(Jamaica) Where a rape complainant gave evidence to support the prosecution that she had complained of the offence immediately afterwards, the court should be careful to direct the jury of the caution to be applied to the weight given to that . .
Cited – Regina v Wallwork CCA 1958
The defendant was charged with the incest of his 5 year old daughter. She was called into the witness box, but was unable to give evidence. Her grandmother was called and gave evidence of the complaint made to her by the girl.
Held: The terms . .
Cited – Regina v Braye-Jones 1966
(Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal) The admissibility of evidence of recent complaint where the evidence of the complainant and the evidence of the contemporaneous complaint differed. Rejecting the suggestion that evidence of the contemporaneous . .
Cited – Regina v Nazif 1987
(New Zealand Court of Appeal) The complainant gave evidence of an indecent assault, whereas the evidence given of the complaint was of an assault; Somers J dealt with the issue (which was one among several) very shortly: ‘The third question arises . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.197822