Parker v. State

Bryan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The indictment against the prisoner contained two • counts. The first charged that he had committed a rape on the person of one Kitty Wills, and the second charged an assault upon her with intent to commit a rape. He was acquitted on the first count and convicted on the second.

The case comes before us on two bills of exception taken at the trial. The first bill of exception states that the prosecuting witness gave evidence tending to show the commission of the offence charged in the indictment by the prisoner, on a certain Saturday. There are two offences charged in the indictment; we presume the offence intended to be designated is the rape, and not the assault with intent to commit it. The mother of the prosecuting witness then testified that on Friday after the Saturday on which the assault was alleged to have been committed, she found her daughter’s drawers under certain steps with blood stains upon them.

She was then asked this question by the State: “ What did the girl, Kitty Wills, say on that occasion was the reason she had hid the drawers ? ” Objection to the question was overruled by the Court, and the witness was permitted to answer it. The answer is thus stated in the bill of exception: “ Whereupon, the witness, in answer, stated that the girl, crying all the time, said: “Now, mother, if you will make me a faithful promise not to whip me, I will tell you the truth about it: uncle Tom Parker took me up in his arms and threw me dowm on the ground, pulled up my clothes, and put something in me sharp like a knife, and made me cry; when I got up, I said-1 was going back home and tell my mamma, and he said if I did, he would kill me and throw me in the river, and run for his life ; he told me to hide the drawers, and if you said anything about them, to tell you to come to him. ” It would have been competent to prove on the examination in chief that the party alleged ³³¹ to have been injured made complaint while the injury was recent; but the details and circumstances of the transaction cannot be proved on such examination by her declarations. 1 Greenleaf’s Evidence, section 102. The offer now under consideration was an attempt to prove by her declarations that she had hidden her drawers and shew her motive for hiding them. When an outrage has been committed on a woman, the instincts of her nature prompt her to make her wrongs known, and to seek sympathy and assistance.

The complaint which she then makes is the natural expression of her feelings. It may therefore be shown in evidence as a circumstance, which would usually and probably have occurred in case the offence had been committed. But the evidence which the Court admitted is not of this nature. It is simply hearsay; a narration of a past event, and not the language of any emotion caused by the supposed occurrence.

At the beginning of