Commonwealth v. Clayton

After considering all the evidence presented, a jury found the defendant guilty on an indictment charging him with having “sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse with a child,” see G. L. c. 265, § 23, at “divers times” from 1979 until about 1987. On appeal, the defendant claims that his conviction must be reversed because of numerous errors made in the course of the proceedings against him.1 We conclude that the trial judge erroneously restricted the defendant’s cross-examination of the complaining witness concerning the reasons for her delayed complaint and reverse the conviction.