Commonwealth v. Rathburn

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that a thirteen-year-old victim did not demonstrate “extraordinary [sexual] knowledge” by using terms such as “penis,” “butt,” “hard,” or “rubbing” (cleaned up)
• evidence of past sexual conduct not admissible where child does not display “knowledge of sexual matters beyond his or her years”
• victim’s failure to confirm previous allegations of abuse does not constitute “concrete evidence” that allegations were false
• jurors would have assumed some degree of sexual sophistication on part of thirteen year old witness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).