When a minor alleges that she was in possession of a stolen Raptor Raptor when the Raptor was stolen, does the minor have to prove that she knew it was stolen?

The minor also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to prove that she knew the Raptor was stolen. "Knowledge that property was stolen can seldom be proved by direct evidence and resort must often be made to circumstantial evidence. However, no distinction is made between direct and circumstantial evidence in the degree of proof required. [Citation.] 'Possession of recently stolen property is so incriminating that to warrant conviction there need only be, in addition to possession, slight corroboration in the form of statements or conduct of the defendant tending to show his guilt.'" (People v. Vann (1974) 12 Cal.3d 220, 224.)