Appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison County. No. 94-CF-22. This Opinion Substituted on Grant of Motion to Publish Two Additional Paragraphs for Vacated Opinion of June 16, 1997, Previously
Presiding Justice Kuehn delivered the opinion of the court. Hopkins, J., and Maag, J., concur.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kuehn
This cause has been considered on the appellee's motion to publish two additional paragraphs, and the court being fully advised finds:
That on June 16, 1997, this court filed an opinion in this cause, and the opinion included nonpublishable text, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23 (Official Reports Advance Sheet No. 15 (July 20, 1994), effective July 1, 1994);
That on June 25, 1997, appellee filed a motion to publish two additional paragraphs of said nonpublishable text; and
That this court desires to grant the motion, vacate the opinion filed on June 16, 1997, and substitute a new opinion in its stood, changing to publishable text the two paragraphs which begin on page 10.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the appellee's motion to publish two additional paragraphs shall be, and the same is hereby, GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the opinion filed on June 16, 1997, shall be, and the same is hereby, VACATED AND HELD FOR NAUGHT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the opinion filed on this date shall stand as the decision of the court.
PRESIDING JUSTICE KUEHN delivered the opinion of the court:
This case features a six-year-old child witness whose testimony exhibited her understanding of fellatio and its effect upon the male sex organ. Her precocious sexual insight was attributed to defendant's sexual tutelage. Defendant was found guilty of aggravated criminal sexual assault and punished with an 18-year prison term. Defendant appeals.
This appeal challenges a court-ordered ban of evidence under the rape shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 1992)). The order precluded any mention during trial of the child witness's prior fellatio report with someone other than defendant. Defendant stands on his constitutional right to present a full and fair defense. He argues that the rape shield statute's preclusion of other sexual conduct must yield where such conduct can rebut inferences of guilt that accompany a child witness's display of abnormal sexual knowledge.
Thus, we are asked to overturn the verdict, order a new trial, and direct that the next jury be fully informed about the child witness's age-inappropriate sexual knowledge. Defendant seeks a trial that includes evidence that rebuts the inference that his accuser's age-inappropriate knowledge of fellatio and its effects was derived from him. He wants to show that such knowledge had another male source.
The State's case against defendant rested entirely on the testimony of a little girl named A.H. A.H. told of many things commonly beyond the ken of little girls. She graphically described, in her own way, the appearance of defendant's sexual anatomy and the effects of fellatio on that anatomy. She described penile erection, ejaculation, ejaculate, and ejaculate's taste. Her uncommon ...