the evidence of Winters’ mental defect relating to her legal capacity to consent was far from overwhelming. The State’s key witness on the issue was Berrian, the psychologist who had conducted a one-time battery of tests to determine whether Winters should continue with special education. Based on these tests, he classified her as “intellectually deficient” in terms of. her IQ and “severely delayed on the other tests.” But Berrian’s testimony went no further. Significantly, none of his testimony related to Winters’ mental defects as it related to her ability to say “no” to sexual touching; nor did he testify about her capacity to evaluate the moral nature of sexual conduct, which would have been relevant given the statutory definitions governing the case. See Callender, 47 P.3d at 520 (<HOLDING>). Nor did- any other expert testify to Winters’
holding in the context of a sexual offense that the statutory definition of mentally defective encompasses those incapable of assessing the right and wrong or moral quality of a persons conduct holding that sexual contact unambiguously encompasses the touching of oneself holding that the definition of operating deficits is not ambiguous despite the absence of a definition of the phrase in the contract holding that the illinois statutory definitions of sexual penetration and sexual conduct cover clearly distinct conduct and that therefore the statute was not unconstitutionally vague holding government does not have right to control moral content of persons thoughts