State v. Stewart

Citations

• 52 Wash. 61
• 100 P. 153
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 1075

Syllabus

<p>Rape — Evidence-—-Complaint Made by Prosecutrix — Corroboration Connecting Defendant With Crime. Evidence of complaint made by the prosecutrix, soon after a rape, is admissible only as corroborative proof that the complainant was raped, and it is not such, corroboration as “tends to convict the defendant of the commission of the offense,” within the requirement of Laws 1907, p. 396; since some substantial fact or circumstance independent of the statement of the prosecutrix is required.</p> <p>Same — Instructions. An instruction which singles out and makes prominent the complaint made by the prosecutrix, without qualification or explanation of its character as evidence, as a “corroborating circumstance, tending to support her testimony . relating to the alleged crime of rape having been committed upon her,” is prejudicial error tending to mislead the jury into finding therefrom corroboration tending to connect the defendant with the crime (Fullerton and Dunbar, JJ., dissenting).</p> <p>Statutes — Rule of Construction. In construing a statute, the courts must look to the old law, the mischief and the remedy.</p>