A delay of 66 days between a sexual assault and the complainant's disclosure to her mother does not necessarily render the complaint inadmissible under s 66 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), particularly where the delay is explicable by the complainant's circumstances including a business and accommodation relationship between the complainant's mother and the offender. Complaint evidence that is 'vague' or lacking in detail may still be admissible where it is capable of providing corroboration and is clearly indicative of an unwelcome sexual advance. Introductory judicial remarks describing the Crown Prosecutor as acting 'on behalf of the community' and the jury as representing the community do not, without more, create an unfair imbalance against the accused.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.