R v SZEJNOGA No. Sccrm-98-72 Judgment No. S6853

The Court of Criminal Appeal was asked to consider the admissibility of evidence in the case of R v Szejnoga, where the appellant was convicted of rape. The appeal hinged on two key issues: the admissibility of the victim's complaint to her mother and the adequacy of the trial judge’s direction to the jury regarding that evidence. The victim, SD, had reported the alleged rape to her mother, Mrs D, shortly after the incident occurred, but the appellant argued that this complaint was inadmissible as it was not spontaneous. Furthermore, the appellant contended that the trial judge's directions to the jury on the weight to be given to the complaint were inadequate.

The Court found that the evidence of the complaint was admissible as it demonstrated consistency in SD's account of events. The court adopted the reasoning from Suresh v The Queen and The Queen v Gallagher, emphasizing that evidence of a complaint is admissible if it shows consistency and spontaneity. In this case, the Court held that the complaint was made spontaneously within minutes of SD arriving at her mother’s house and was consistent with her distressed state. The judge noted that the mother's questions were natural and inevitable, and did not prompt the complaint in a way that would render it inadmissible. Additionally, the Court determined that the trial judge’s directions to the jury, although not detailed, were sufficient for the jury to understand the importance of the spontaneity of the complaint in assessing its credibility.

The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Criminal Appeal, with all judges agreeing that the trial judge's handling of the evidence and directions were appropriate and that the conviction should stand.