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