(4) the characteristics of the event being described, and (5) the subject matter of the statement.” Id. (quoting State v. Atwood, 602 N.W.2d 775, 782 (Iowa 1999)). The court must consider all the factors to determine if the statements are admissible. State v. Hy, 458 N.W.2d 609, 611 (Iowa Ct.App.1990). The neighbor’s testimony regarding B.O.’s statements is problematic because of the time lapse between the alleged event and the statements and the extent to which questioning elicited the statements that otherwise would not have been volunteered. First, the lapse of time was from Friday evening, when the last incident occurred, to sometime before Sunday afternoon. This factor is not determinative and on its own, is not enough to take the statements out of the exception. See id. (<HOLDING>). Second, the statement must be spontaneous and
holding that testimony of sixyearold vietim was not incredibly dubious despite some inconsistencies and that such inconsistencies are appropriate to the cireumstances presented the age of the witness and the passage of time between the incident and the time of her statements and testimony holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse  and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse holding evidence of outofstate instances of abuse admissible in child sexual abuse case to show intent opportunity and relationship between defendant and victim holding a fouryear olds statements disclosing sexual abuse to her parents were admissible despite the passage of time because she disclosed at the first possible opportunity holding that statements are admissible in absence of showing that parents were not notified in accordance with statute