sexual intercourse. This argument could not persuade me. The prosecutrix testified that at the time she was thrown into the back seat of the car, she had become so weak that she could not put up any resistance to the accused. The absence of injuries in her private part, in my view, indicates that there was no resistance from the prosecutrix and the accused had little or no difficulties in penetrating her. The prosecutrix was 20 years old at the time of the incident and I am satisfied that she knew what sexual intercourse meant at that time. She was very consistent and steadfast and it was easy to visualize from her testimony a true picture of how the accused ravished her sexually. I observed the demeanor and the manner in which the prosecutrix gave her evidence; she broke down in tears when she gave evidence of how the accused penetrated her. I believe upon the evidence of the prosecutrix that she was ravished by the accused after having been thrown into the back seat of the car. In addition, to the above, the prosecutrix informed PW4 on the very day of the incident of the ordeal she had gone through in the hands of the cab driver (accused). She was taken to the hospital by PW4 and was medically examined at about 2 am. The hymen was missing and she presented with some whitish vaginal discharge. Medical jurisprudence indicates that such discharges could be normal or abnormal. In the instant case, there was unchallenged oral evidence from the prosecutrix that the vaginal discharge necessitated an HIV test on her, suggesting it was an abnormal discharge, resulting from the sexual encounter. The accused himself gave evidence that he abandoned the 11