Under s 34M of the Evidence Act 1929 (SA), a complainant's disclosure that admittedly fabricates the time, location, and circumstances of offending is not a 'complaint' of the charged sexual offence, even where the complainant explains the fabrication was due to embarrassment and intended to refer to the charged conduct. The complainant's subjective intention does not determine whether the words used constitute a complaint of the charged offence. A complainant's out-of-court response to a communication from the accused asserting wrongdoing is an inadmissible prior consistent statement where it serves no purpose other than to bolster the complainant's credibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.