flagrante delicto

feels vaguely familiar – but isn’t, really!

Definition of flagrante delicto: (flə-grăn'tē dĭ-lĭk'tō) Latin
adv. “1. In the very act of committing an offense; red-handed. 2. In the act of having sex. 3. Literally while the crime is blazing. Caught red-handed, in the very act of a crime.” (answers.com)

Where I ran across it:
1/26/08 Washington Post online article by Michael O’Sullivan, “Man vs. Beast: An Intimate Look” originally published Friday, January 18, 2008; Page WE39.

“...Let's get right to the point: 'Julie Comnick: According to Their Kind' is about the act of procreation. But the artist is less interested in sex than in politics. At once coolly clinical and subtly disturbing, the show features 20 works but centers on seven pictures of animals coupling. Of the pandas, zebras, macaques, elephants, giraffes, flamingos and lions caught in flagrante delicto, none looks especially happy -- with the possible exception of the pandas, who are just too darn cuddly to ever look miserable...”

My two cents:
The phrase in question – flagrante delicto - really peaked my curiosity. I’m neither Latin scholar nor lawyer, but I was able to assume some correct measure of meaning from the context alone. However, given that the article is about art portraying animals having sex, one might also wonder if this phrase were actual Latin or a delightfully literate pun. I mean, with “flagrant” attached to another word suggestively close to “delectable / delicious,” who could blame me for tittering just a bit? Turns out it’s bona fide Latin legalese, but I still think it’s clever and “punny.” Is that a crime? So sue me.