## Facts

- Gulielma A. Glover, a minor suing by next friend, brought a Massachusetts tort action for damages against Cornelius J. Callahan for an alleged indecent assault.
- The plaintiff, about eight years old at the time, alleged that the defendant assaulted her with intent carnally to know and abuse her.
- The plaintiff testified to the acts constituting the alleged assault; another girl of the same age also testified in a manner that, if believed, supported a finding that the defendant committed the assault with that intent.
- Evidence placed the time of the alleged assault between about 11:35 and 11:55 a.m.
- The plaintiff testified on direct examination that she told her mother and a police officer soon after the incident the same facts she described at trial.
- The mother and the police officer were then permitted to testify not only that the child made a complaint, but also to relate what she told them; their testimony substantially matched the plaintiff’s account.
- The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff in the amount of $3,750.
- The defendant filed exceptions, challenging (among other things) the admission of the corroborative complaint testimony and the trial judge’s refusal to give certain requested instructions, including a request tied to the plaintiff’s consent.

## Issues

1. In a civil action for damages based on an alleged indecent (rape-type) assault, may the plaintiff introduce evidence that she made a complaint soon after the assault to corroborate her testimony?
2. If such “fresh complaint” evidence is admissible, may the corroborating witnesses recount the contents of the complaint, including details, rather than only the fact that a complaint was made?
3. Did the trial judge commit reversible error in refusing the defendant’s requested rulings and in the portions of the jury charge to which the defendant excepted (including the request relating to consent)?

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts overruled the defendant’s exceptions and let the plaintiff’s verdict stand.
- The court held that the rule admitting evidence of a prompt complaint in rape and similar prosecutions applies as well in civil actions seeking damages for comparable sexual assaults, because the evidence is received for corroboration of the complainant’s testimony.
- The court held that, in Massachusetts, when complaint evidence is admitted for corroboration, “the whole of the statement made by her, including the details, is admissible.”
- The court concluded that the child’s complaint to her mother and to the police officer—made within a short time after the alleged assault—was sufficiently prompt and was properly admitted.
- The court found no reversible error in the refusals of requested instructions or in the challenged portions of the charge.

## Legal Principles

- In Massachusetts, in both criminal prosecutions for rape (and related offenses) and civil actions for damages arising from similar sexual assaults, evidence that the complainant made a prompt complaint may be admitted for the limited purpose of corroborating the complainant’s testimony.
- Although prior consistent statements are ordinarily excluded unless and until a witness has been impeached, the court recognized that, in rape-type cases, the absence of a complaint may itself be used as a reason to doubt credibility; proof of a prompt complaint is therefore permitted as corroborative evidence.
- When complaint evidence is admitted for corroboration in Massachusetts, the corroborating witness may testify to the entire statement made by the complainant, including details, rather than only to the bare fact that a complaint occurred.
- Whether a complaint is “fresh” depends on timing and circumstances; a complaint made shortly after the alleged assault may qualify and be received to corroborate the complainant’s account.

## Conclusion

In *Glover v. Callahan*, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a plaintiff’s verdict in a civil indecent-assault action brought by a child, holding that fresh-complaint evidence is admissible in such civil cases to corroborate the complainant and that, once admitted for that corroborative purpose, the testimony may include the details of what the complainant reported soon after the alleged assault.


Glover v. Callahan, 12 N.E.2d 194 (1937)