Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!dave
From: dave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Use of John Doe
Message-ID: <4975@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 30-Jul-84 13:03:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.4975
Posted: Mon Jul 30 13:03:17 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 30-Jul-84 14:25:56 EDT
References: <3570@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: The Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 14

In article <3570@brl-tgr.ARPA> wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) writes:
~| What is the origin of the term "John Doe" for an unknown male person
~| (or body)? Is this an "official" term, however that may be defined?
~| Is "Jane Doe" the female equivalent, or does "John Doe" act as a 
~| non-sex-specific general term?

Yes, it is a legally-accepted way of specifying an unknown person.
The female equivalent is indeed Jane Doe. The usage goes back
a few hundred years, I believe; I do not know its origin.

Dave Sherman
Toronto
-- 
 {allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!dave