We know that in sex cases, "penetration is complete, however slight." I cannot find a definition in the in the code...does it arise from case law? If so, does anyone know the cite? Thanks!

Check out Cowan v.State, 562 SW2d 236 and cases cited therein

For a more recent, and more graphic, description of penetration and its meaning absent a statutory definition, see Vernon v. State, 841 SW2d 407.

My Judge is writing a paper on sex offenses. You all make me look brilliant. Special thanks to Greg Miller of my office who e-mailed me about 20 seconds after my post. Long live the user forum.

For what it's worth, sub-s.4(5) of the Criminal Code of Canada states: For the purposes of this Act, sexual intercourse is complete upon penetration to even the slightest degree, notwithstanding that seed is not emitted.


In R. v. Johns (1956), 25 C.R. 153 at p. 154 it was held that:

". . . for the purposes of s. 3(6)[now sub-s. 4(5)] of the Code sexual intercourse is complete upon penetration of the labia, either majora or labia minora, no matter how little, even though the hymen was never touched nor is there any penetration of the vagina."

A warm welcome to the first international poster (that I'm aware of). So interesting to see statutory language in the Queen's English.

Glad to take part.

My friend, Mike Little, appears to be a regular contibutor. We were both at childProof at the NAC in July 2000. I note that the Centre was the subject of a thread a few months back. I can only re-state what was said back then: CLE at the National Advocacy Centre is top notch, and I'd recommend it to anyone thinking of polishing up the court room skills.

I suppose in the technical sense, a post from a Canadian is an international post, but I think of Canadians as being just like us. Sure their accents are a little different--but then, so are Minnasoteans'. As a Canadian friend of mine used to say, "Canadians are much like Americans--only less so." (I was never quite sure what that meant).

Well Terry, you might count as an 'International' too, given your history.

John, are you suggesting that Terry is not of this planet?

I was under the impression that Terry had an international background, not an interplanetary one, but if you know something please share.

Isn't Terry the fellow that prosecuted in Africa? That's what I was talking about. If I have misidentified him, then I apologize to the person I've confused him with.

I was a Public Prosecutor in Zimbabwe for two years. My first trial was to prosecute a fellow for selling mangos on a public sidewalk without a venders' license. Eventually, I graduated to trying theives, rioters, Witchcraft Suppression Act violators, as well as violations of the Law & Order (Maintenance) Act (which prohibits causing someone to do that which they are not legally obliged to do.) Towards the end of my career, I was briefly "detained" (arrested with no criminal law rights) under the Emergancy Regulations, because someone alleged I was a threat to state security. Zimbabwe is definitely a foreign country.

I was also a prosecutor in New Mexico for a little over a year. While N.M. is not technically a foreign country (their license plates even say so--"New Mexico, U.S.A.")their criminal law and their ideas about law enforcement seemed pretty foreign to me. Even interplanetary at times.

Terry, were you a citizen of Zimbabwe, there as legal immigrant, or part of some sort of international or UN tribunal?

I entered Zimbo as a tourist and after I got my job, I got a work permit. Zimbabwe does not allow illegal aliens to work as prosecutors.

At the time, Zimbabwe's criminal courts were far more efficent, and reach a just result far more often than any court in the U.S. could hope to do. We worked hard to keep the forces of darkness at bay. Of course, since I left, the place has gone to hell in a hand basket.