People v. Williams

Defendant was convicted of a violation of subdivision 1 of section 261 of the Penal Code. The prosecuting witness was a girl of the age of about fourteen years at the time of the commission of the offense. The defendant was her stepfather.

Appellant objects that the evidence is insufficient because the language used by the prosecuting witness in giving her testimony is not sufficiently definite and specific in describing the act of sexual intercourse. In cases of this character, it is rare, indeed, that children use scientific or precise anatomical terms. The argument made by appellant is that the prosecuting witness is not an" ordinary child, but that her experience in sexual matters at the time of the trial, as disclosed by the record, made it possible for her to have described the occurrence with absolute exactness. Her experiences, as disclosed by -the record, would have no effect upon the precision of her language. It is unnecessary to set forth her testimony here. It is sufficient to say that it is unambiguous and much more definite than usual in eases of this character. It assuredly left no doubt in the minds of the jury.

[1] Appellant objects to an instruction given by…