6. Whether the accused raised a defence. On ISSUE 1, whether there was carnal knowledge, the prosecution submits that PW 2 Mariama Manga Jallow a police woman stationed at Bakau Police station testified that she was instructed to escort PW1 to the Bakau Health Centre and thereafter to the Royal Victoria Teaching Hospital (RVTH) where she was examined by a doctor in her presence. A few days later, she returned to the RVTH and collected the medical certificate which was issued on behalf of PW1. The said certificate was tendered and admitted in evidence through her and marked Exhibit N0. 1. She further submitted that exhibit 1 clearly indicated that there was penetration resulting to fresh bruised hymeneal tear of PW 1’s virgina which infact confirms the carnal knowledge of PW 1. The Defence Counsel in her reply merely narrated almost the same as the prosecution. She did not deny or challenge the content of Exhibit 1. One cannot find a better evidence on the issue of penetration or carnal knowledge of PW 1 than the medical evidence. In the Privy Council case of JAMES V. R from Jamaica (1970) 55 Cr App. R 299 on a charge of rape, it was held that the medical evidence showing that the complainant had had sexual intercourse at about a time consistent with her allegation was incapable of affording corroboration of her evidence of the rape, because it did not confirm anymore than an act of sexual intercourse. It is clear from this authority that the medical evidence exhibit 1 did confirm that there was an act of sexual intercourse or in other words, there was an act of carnal knowledge of PW 1. Extending the issue a little further, it can be said that the slightest penetration will suffice and it is not necessary to prove that the hymen was 14