With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". decision that the outcry statement is reliable and admissible under article 38.072 is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Broderick v. State, 89 S.W.3d 696, 698 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. refd). At a hearing outside the jury’s presence, appellant argued that only the first person to whom a sexually abused child made a statement qualified as the outcry witness. Appellant argued that, because J.C.’s mother was the first person to whom J.C. made a statement about the offense, only she could testify as to any outcry statement under article 38.072. The Court of Criminal Appeals in Garcia v. State held that, at least where the child makes only a “general allusion” of sexual abuse to the first person, but gives a more detailed account to a second Fort Worth 1992, pet. refd) (<HOLDING>). The Court in Garcia stated the following: In

A: holding that evidence was sufficient to support trial courts best interest finding where mother allowed child to be in contact with individual who had physically abused her mother was not capable of caring for child on her own mother admitted at trial she had not found stable employment and child was doing well in her current placement
B: holding that mother was not proper outcry witness despite being first person child told of fathers abuse because mother refused to admit statement was made to her refused to cooperate with authorities and had been convicted of related offense
C: holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was factually sufficient to support termination
D: holding that a mother and her two children failed to establish a  1983 claim where there was no evidence that threats made to the mother were directly aimed at the relationship between parent and child
B.