The most important and essential ingredient of the offence is penetration. The Court will deem that sexual intercourse is complete upon proof of penetration of the penis into the vagina. Any or even the slightest penetration will be sufficient to constitute the act of sexual intercourse. See: Posu Vs The State (2011) ALL FWLR (Pt.565) 234 @ 250 B E; Jegede Vs The State (2001) 14 NWLR (R.733) 264; Ogunbayo vs The State (2007) ALL FWLR (Pt. 355) 408. It is important to note that under the Penal Code a child who is under the age of 14 years is incapable of giving consent See: Sections 39 (c) and 282 (1) (e) of the Code. See also: Shuaibu Isa Vs Kano State (2016) LPELR - 400 11 (SC). Therefore once it is proved that the accused person had sexual intercourse or unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 14 years, he is guilty of rape. At the time she testified, PW1 was seven years old. She gave cogent and credible evidence as to what took place on the day of the incident. She gave a detailed account of what transpired, how she reported to her father, PW2 who in turn reported the matter to the Police, and how she was taken to hospital and examined by a doctor, In spite of her tender age, the trial Court found her to be a credible and convincing witness. Taking advantage of her young age, learned counsel for the appellant tried to discredit her testimony under cross-examination by asking whether it was the appellants finger or her penis that was inserted into her vagina. She replied that she did not know the difference. However under reexamination, she was emphatic that it was his penis and not his finger that was inserted into her vagina. The purpose of re-examination is to clear up any ambiguity that may have arisen as a result of cross-examination. Learned counsel