Running Head: At the Scene of Responsibility and Blame

Depicting a Scene of Responsibility and Blame:

An Analysis of the Stanford Rape Case Using Kenneth Burke’s Pentad

Maggie Franke

Wheaton College
2
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

Abstract

On January 18, 2015, two graduate students at Stanford University witnessed an unconscious

woman being sexually assaulted behind a dumpster. Little did they know that when they sprang

into action, they set forth a series of events that would impact cases of sexual assault in the

United States and public perception of perpetrators and victims. For the next year and a half, two

stories were told before the jury. Relying on Kenneth Burke’s pentad, I analyze the court case of

Emily Doe v. Turner. I argue that the prosecution emphasized the control of the agent over the

act the while the defense emphasized the control of the scene over the agent. This article reveals

how two different ways of describing the same event can produce can create drastically different

storylines of responsibility. On top of this, I assert that the defense attempted to tell agent-

dominant account of the victim’s actions, which reflects the wider cultural trend of victim

blaming.

Disclaimer: Graphic and disturbing language is used in this paper in reference to the sexual

assault of the Emily Doe v. Turner case.

3
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

The Emily Doe v. Turner court case was front page news throughout the entire year and a

half trial. During this time, the victim was identified as Emily Doe to protect her true identity and

provide anonymity. By the end of the trial, Brock Turner was a household name at the center of

serious conversations surrounding sexual assault, college campus culture, partying and feminism.

These sexual crimes and the court cases that follow involve many narratives and require

the close attention of the public to see just how the justice system works in the United States and

around the world to hold people accountable under the law. The Duke Rape Case, the Nassar

Case, the Harvey Weinstein case and many others have changed the way that citizens of this

country view justice for crimes of sexual harassment, assault and abuse. Understanding the

narratives at the foundation of the arguments within the court can provide the possibility for

better understanding of this case specifically and what makes finding justice in sex crimes so

difficult for everyone involved.

When looking at controversial court cases, it requires the public to stay as informed as

possible to develop an enlightened opinion and to always remember that the ultimate decision of

conviction and sentencing is up to the jury and the judge. However, in some of these cases

injustice is revealed within the justice system and requires action from the public to hold the

system itself accountable. Emily Doe v. Turner predates the #MeToo movement but is often seen

as the writing on the wall for what was to come.

In the summer of 2016, California released nine documents from the case. From the

Sheriff’s initial report to the victim’s statement made in court herself, these documents are

available to the pubic to read online (Kadvany, 2016). In these documents, multiple stories

emerge that attempt to depict various perspectives of the night’s events as well as what was said

in court. These are the documents that were examined and analyzed in this essay.
4
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

The linguistics of the documents have been analyzed before (Potter, 2017) but looking

through the lens of Kenneth Burke’s pentad reveals more hidden truths about how the

prosecution and defense argued the particulars of this case. Brock Turner’s letter to the judge and

the victim’s statement have the clearest contrast in the storyline they depicted and provide a

representation of the differences between the narratives themselves.

A base-level understanding of Burke’s pentad is first laid out in this paper as well as a

brief summary of the events of the Emily Doe v. Turner case. The victim’s statement and other

documents accounting the perspective of the prosecution are then analyzed. Turner’s letter is

then analyzed based on the narrative surrounding his decisions on the night of the assault before

a deeper analysis of the defense’s statements is illuminated. Finally, Burke’s pentad is applied to

the concept of victim blaming.

A summary of Burke’s Pentad

Kenneth Burke was one of the most well-renowned philosophers and theorists of the 20th

Century, and his famous pentad looked into motives and human reasoning within situations. The

five aspects that make up the pentad are: act, agency, agent, purpose and scene (Burke, 1969).

Burke asserted that these five pieces lay out how to create a perspective surrounding stories. The

act represents the event that took place. The scene clarifies where the act happened, which can

mean a physical location or time period or state of affairs. The agent is the person or group of

people that performed the act. The agency is how the act was performed, and the purpose is why

the act occurred.

All five of these are constantly in relationship with one another in every scenario, and

understanding which ones dominate certain situations can allow critiques to find fault, discover

how to communicate the story clearest, and reach a general understanding of what happened and
5
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

why (Burke, 1969). With this in mind, there is so much involved in every scenario that impacts

the act itself. This is precisely how Burke believed that a perspective on a story can be developed

(Burke, 1969). When various aspects of his pentad—act, agency, agent, purpose and scene—are

said to have more of an influence in a story, different perspectives and motives of the story are

revealed.

Scene-dominated scenarios emphasis a “fate” philosophy. The agent has very little

control over their actions (Burke, 1969). Peers, environment, culture and various other pressures

almost force the agent to commit acts in this perspective. Agent-dominated arguments focus on

free will. The agent has the ultimate control over their own actions no matter the environment or

purpose.

Burke’s theory at its base level lays out the pieces involved in every situation. The next

level of Burke’s pentad reveals how certain pieces influence the situation more than others. Little

did the members of the prosecution and defense know, but their arguments were centered around

which piece dominated the decisions made on the night of the crime.

Emily Doe v. Turner

In the middle of January, 2015, a fraternity at Stanford University hosted a party. 19-

year-old Turner attended with his friends on the varsity swimming team and recent college

graduate Chanel Miller went with her younger sister. Little did either of them know that, at the

end of the night, Miller would be rushed to the hospital and Turner was brought in for police

questioning (Hamilton, 2016).

According to the case files and news articles covering the case, two Swedish graduate

students were biking late that night and noticed a man lying on top of what seemed to be a limp

figure nearby a dumpster (Court documents). Thinking that someone was in danger, the graduate
6
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

students jumped into action. Turner fled the scene as they chased him, but they tackled him while

a third party called the police. Miller was found unconscious, partly clothed but breathing and

was rushed to the hospital. Three hours later, she would wake up in the hospital with a blood-

alcohol level more than triple the legal driving limit and no recollection of what had happened

(Knowles, 2016).

Miller would later describe in her statement how she read what had happened that night

in a news article. Doctors removed pine needles from her hair and performed a rape kit, later

telling Miller that she had been penetrated vaginally with a foreign object. After further tests,

Turner was arrested on three felony counts: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated

woman, sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object and sexually penetrating

an unconscious person with a foreign object, all committed against Miller (Hamilton, 2016).

The case went to court, and Turner plead not guilty on all counts and hired a defense

attorney (Hamilton, 2016). Almost immediately, the media covered the case partly because

Turner was an All-American, Olympic-level swimmer (Hamilton, 2016). His best times and

athletic titles were even listed at the end of many of the articles covering the initial accusation. In

June of 2016, the jurors determined that the evidence brought before the court was sufficient to

convict Brock Turner of all the three felony counts (Hamilton, 2016).

Based on the crimes themselves, Turner was facing up to 14 years in county jail, but the

prosecution asked for a six-year sentence. On June 2nd, 2016, Santa Clara County Superior Court

Judge Aaron Perksy sentenced Turner to six months in county jail and three years’ probation

(CNN, 2016). Turner also lost his swimming scholarship at Stanford, was banned by USA

Swimming for life and had to register as a sex offender in Ohio, his home state. The sentencing

was viewed as too lenient by many members of the public, the prosecution and the victim herself
7
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

(Stack, 2016). The aftermath that followed resulted in the county voting to recall Persky in June

of 2018. The push to recall the judge was lead by Michele Dauber, a professor at Stanford Law

School who knew the victim personally (Arkin, 2018). Less than two months later, Brock Turner

appealed his 2016 conviction in a California appeals court (Hauser, 2018). His lawyer, Eric

Multhaup, argued that Turner did not receive a fair trial, that there was insufficient evidence and

Turner pursued only “outercourse” with the victim (Hauser, 2018). The appeals court upheld his

original conviction.

Throughout this entire process, the victim was known to the public as “Emily Doe” or

“Jane Doe” or simply as “the victim.” In September of 2019, Chanel Miller published her

memoir entitled Know My Name which summarizes her perspective of the events that occurred

on the night of the assault and the many difficulties that followed during the trial. Miller later

told CNN that, “"Only when the book was completed was I at peace with the idea that I could

emerge, that I could be seen as a writer -- not only his victim” (Medina, 2019).

The single aspect of Burke’s pentad in this case that is generally agreed upon is that the

act was the assault on the victim. The parts of this case that are argued involve the scene and the

agent and which one had more power over the purpose of the act itself. Here, the prosecution and

defense emphasis major differences in what controlled the act that night.

The entire story of the events that followed laid out two narratives of that night. In this

paper, I will illuminate how the prosecution emphasized an agent-act dominant perspective and

how it contrasted with the scene-agent dominant perspective that the defense attempted to

portray. On top of this, I assert that Burke’s theory should be applied further into this

conversation to the all-too-common trend of victim blaming that the defense used in this case.
8
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

The defense tried to convince the jury that, with Chanel Miller as the agent, her story was

influenced more by an agent-act dominant philosophy.

The prosecution and the dominance of agent

There are three main documents that express the rhetoric that the prosecution used during

the trial: a petition signed by 255 Stanford students, a letter from Stanford professor Michele

Dauber, and the victim’s statement (Court documents). Each of these express explicitly how

Turner, the agent, had control over the assault, the act, and should be held accountable by the

law. These documents focused on the sentencing of Brock Turner and called the judge to give a

just sentence.

Phrases like “sexual assault” and “violence” and “Turner’s actions” are used throughout

the petition signed by the students. Labels like these are a telling sign of their perspective on

Turner’s control over his actions that night. “Sexual assault” elicits that there was a victim and

and a perpetrator, and labeling the crime as sexual assault and vocalizing that is significant in a

society where the labels are hesitantly placed on these crimes (People v. Brock Allen Turner

(8/9)). The below statement from the petition makes it very clear that the 255 people who signed

it believed that Turner had control over his actions.

…, Mr. Turner, along with the rest of the freshman class, was

required to listen to hours of speeches on the importance of

acquiring consent and not engaging in sexual activities when

alcohol is involved or the other person is unconscious and unable

to give consent. The multitude of training shows that Mr. Turner

was surely aware of the gravity of his wrongdoing, and yet he still

chose to commit a horrendous crime (p. 33).

9
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

It is clear in this paragraph that the students are alleging that Turner was not ignorant of the

gravity of the offenses he committed when he sexually assaulted Miller that night.

The second document is a letter to the judge from Michele Dauber. She described his

actions in a paragraph with “him” or “he” as the subject throughout and “she” or the “victim” as

the object of his actions (p. 43). The party was not mentioned. Turner’s drinking was not

mentioned. The one responsible for the events that night is described as Turner. There is no

mention of the scene or its influence over him, just Turner and what he did to the victim. She

wrote, “He degraded and humiliated her by assaulting her in public,” (p. 43).

Finally, the main document is the victim’s statement. In the victim’s statement she

described what she remembered from that night: very little. It is made very clear in her statement

that she believed that Turner was the sole person responsible for his actions against her that

night. She also described the traumatizing ordeal of the entire trial. Here is a portion of her

statement that she spoke before the judge in court.

You are guilty. Twelve jurors convicted you guilty on three felony

counts beyond reasonable doubt. That’s twelves votes per count,

thirty-six confirming guilt, that’s one-hundred percent unanimous

guilt (p. 53).

Sara Potter of Michigan Technological University asserted that the use of specific linguistics in

the court revealed cultural truths about the reasons behind each narrative (Potter). In her essay,

Potter argues that, “she (the victim) carefully constructs all of her arguments to center on his

actions and the actions of the defense” (p. 9).

The defense and the dominance of scene

10
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

There are multiple documents that outline the defense’s argument and their perception of

responsibility: character witness letters on account of the defendant and a letter written to the

judge by the defendant. There were almost 40 letters and emails written to the judge to account

for Turner’s character. From family and friends to coworkers and teachers, Persky read page

after page citing the overall goodness of Turner’s character. Within these letters, the writers take

a very specific perspective on the night in question.

A letter from his older sister reads, “On that fateful night, Brock failed to recognize a

series of signifiers that he surely would have if he hadn’t consumed alcohol that evening”

(People vs. Turner (9/9)). The second half of this sentence reveals that his sister believed that the

scene, not the agent, had control over the decisions made that evening. Alcohol was a major part

of the scene of the party, and it did have a major influence over many of the decisions made that

night. There is logic to this argument. In her book, Donna Freitas (2018) notes that consuming

alcohol can, “lower the self-awareness of both parties” (p. 9).

A friend and former girlfriend of Brock wrote a letter to the judge as well. She went as

far to say that the very person that the District Attorney described in court as Brock Turner was

not the “real” Brock Turner (People vs. Turner (9/9)). Another one of his friends wrote, “Brock

Turner is not a rapist or predator of any kind,” and that he “is not capable of the crimes he is

convicted of” (p. 16). These statements are speaking in defense of Turner’s character, but they

also speak to the believed perspective of the events of that night. Without a shadow of doubt, it is

clear that based on these character witnesses’ statements that the blame is removed from the

agent, Turner, and placed on the circumstances of the party, the scene.

Finally, Brock Turner’s statement to the judge lists his account of the events from that

night. His statement begins with a narrative of Turner’s experience with alcohol on campus
11
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

before it moves into his perceived idea of cultural norms in college. Turner writes, “The swim

team set no limits on partying or drinking and I saw guys take full advantage of these

circumstances, while I was shown to do the same” (p. 34). Here, the scene is clear: party culture

and peer pressure. Lauren J. Germain wrote (2016),

As constructs, male peer groups such as fraternities and athletic

teams do have a bad public reputation when it comes to campus

sexual violence. Too often there are elements of these communities

that are misogynistic whether or not the misogyny is obvious or

intentional. … If members of these groups subscribe to rape-

supportive attitudes and engage in misogynistic and/or violent

behaviors, they can significantly impact the rape-prone nature of a

campus community (p. 46-47).

Germain is affirming Turner’s argument here that places blame on the overall cultural

norms of the society and people in his immediate vicinity. Other factors of Turner’s scene that

influenced his behavior were the cultural norms of his age, his race, his socio-economic class, his

peers and the potential vulnerability to the influence of all these scenic factors. At least this is

what the defense argued in court (Levin & Wong, 2016).

It is important to note that this story is drastically different from the witness accounts and

the perceived recollection of the victim. The victim noted in her statement to the judge that

Turner’s story in court was different from the story he told police on the night of the assault.

There is also a major contrast between the evidence from the case and Turner’s story.

The victim expressed that she did not believe that Turner displayed full remorse for his

actions (People vs. Turner (8/9)). The judge later noted that he believed Turner did show remorse
12
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

in his statement. The public opinion of Turner’s statement reflected that of the victim, and this is

most likely what lead to the public outrage.

The defense portrays a second agent

Of the documents released by Santa Clara County, there are few transcripts written of the

statements made in court (Court documents). There are snapshots of exact quotes that have been

released since the case was officially closed, and several news agencies and newspapers

published their accounts of statements they witnessed while in the courtroom. Michael

Armstrong was Turner’s defense attorney throughout the case, but oftentimes he refused to

comment directly to the press about the case before and after it closed. Hannah Knowles, the

then editor in chief of the Stanford Daily and a current reporter for the Washington Post,

published a daily account of the events of the trial for the Stanford Daily as well as the initial

cross-examination of the victim by the defense.

Knowles noted that “Armstrong then asked Doe if she partied often while in college, as

she had told police in a previous interview,” (Knowles, 2016). Buzzfeed.com, the first news

website to publish the victim’s entire statement, also published this portion of the defense’s cross

examination.

Q: You also talked about, fairly shortly after you got to the Kappa

Alpha house, pretending to welcome people and singing and

embarrassing your sister. That's what you decided to do at that

time; right? That was an intentional thing.

A: Intentional to welcome people or to be silly?

Q: To be silly.

A: Yes.
13
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

Q: Okay. And it would be the same thing when you drank the

quantity of vodka in the red cup. You drank it all down at once;

right?

A: Yes.

Q: Like, chugged it.

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. And that was a decision you made; right?

A: Yes,” (Georgantopoulos, 2016).

Here, the defense is placing Miller as an entirely separate agent in this scenario. Armstrong is

attempting to argue that Miller had control over her actions that night even though she was also

influenced by aspects of the scene. This is an entirely second scenario that the defense has

brought up with the victim as the agent in control of her decisions that night. The victim had free

will to drink alcohol that night. The victim chose to be at the party. The victim chose to get

belligerently drunk and pass out, which, inadvertently resulted in what happened to her.

The reason why this was not successful was simply because the physical evidence and

witness accounts outweighed this argument. Miller did not have control over the specific act that

was committed against her that night because when the act was committed she did not have free

will. Armstrong’s defense strategy to try and undermine the character and credibility of the

victim is not new or uncommon, and it reveals how Burke’s pentad is at work in a wider cultural

norm.

The agent in victim blaming

14
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

This narrative, unfortunately, is all too common in the arguments of defense attorneys in

court during sex crimes. Germain (2016) has an entire chapter in her book entitled “The Paradox

of Embodied Agency.” In this portion of the book, Germain clarifies that the responsibility for

preventing rape and sexual assault is not placed on the potential perpetrators, the control is

placed on the victim as the agent. The victim needs to not walk alone at night, not wear

provocative clothing, not drink too much at parties, otherwise they themselves are choosing to be

“at risk” of sexual assault or rape. Germain argues that “although these behaviors may be

effective anti-crime strategies in general, they perpetuate a system of victim blaming because

many crimes cannot be prevented by these means alone” (p. 25).

This paradox of agency defines and shapes victim blaming in many court cases of sex

crimes, and it is at the very heart of what makes justice in the cases themselves so difficult. In

many of these situations, there are two agents involved in the act itself, but rape and sexual

assault implies that the victim’s power as an agent was taken advantage of or removed entirely

from the situation.

Similar feelings of guilt and shame are associated between female victims of sexual

assault and women who struggle with obesity (French and Brown 1). The societal norms of

responsibility are placed on women to be in control of their bodies no matter the scene that might

prevent them from doing so. Genetics and body types make facing obesity more difficult for

some women but being overweight is still viewed as “their fault.” They should exercise more, eat

less, eat better, etc. However, French and Brown said that “acquaintance rape is now widely

regarded in Western culture as not under the control (or responsibility) of victims, who still often

experience guilt and shame,” (French and Brown 2).

15
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

The statements made during the Emily Doe v. Turner case contradict this argument.

Armstrong argues that Miller did have control as the agent that night. Victim blaming does place

the control on the victim as an agent in the scenario, but French and Brown would agree that

even when there is no possibility of control on account of the victim, the victim still feels guilt

and shame after the incident. Miller spoke about this guilt in her statement in court (People vs.

Turner (8/9)).

The sense that there is an “ideal victim” in cases of sexual assault greatly affects whether

or not victim blaming will be used as a strategy in court (Randall, 2011). This myth of an ideal

victim means that certain victims of sexual assault are more deserving of justice than others

because of decisions they have made in their lives or how they are viewed based on racial

stereotypes (Randall, 2011). Here, the victim is again placed as the agent in this scenario, but

Randall argues that, on top of this, certain victims are portrayed in the light of an agent-dominant

storyline more than others.

Victim blaming places the victim as the agent who should be in control of the situation.

The victim’s decisions are thought to have a direct impact on what happened to them or what

lead to their assault. In the case of Emily Doe v. Turner, there is a clear rebuttal of this truth

based on the conviction of the case. Chanel Miller did not have the free will to consent when she

was unconscious, and she also did not have the free will to defend herself because she was

unconscious.

Conclusion

Agent-dominant and scene-dominant depictions within the Emily Doe v. Turner case

revealed greater trends of victim blaming within the justice system. Victim blaming, at its root, is

an unjust portrayal of the victim as the agent in control of the events of the night of their assault.
16
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

At the same time, not placing enough responsibility on the perpetrators is equally problematic.

The problems within both of these storylines is revealed through the analysis made in this paper

using Kenneth Burke’s pentad (1969). When separated into the five aspects of his pentad, a

greater perspective can be found that illuminates the issues that perpetuated themselves

throughout the justice process of this case.

Chanel Miller read her 7000-word statement before the judge and before Turner in court

(People vs. Turner (8/9)). She did not realize it at the time, but her expressed frustration was

starting to reveal the disconnect at the very heart of the defense’s argument. This disconnect is

rooted in an unjust representation of a scene-dominant situation that removes too much guilt

from the defendant and an unfair portrayal of the victim as her own agent even though she had

complete absence of free will when she was assaulted. Expressing this frustration in court, Miller

said:

I fully respected his right to a trial, but even after twelve jurors

unanimously convicted him guilty of three felonies, all he has

admitted to doing is ingesting alcohol. Someone who cannot take

full accountability for his actions does not deserve a mitigating

sentence. It is deeply offensive that he would try and dilute rape

with a suggestion of “promiscuity.” By definition rape is the

absence of promiscuity, rape is the absence of consent, and it

perturbs me deeply that he can’t even see that distinction (p. 57).

It is the responsibility of the public to see this double standard, in the clarity that was

revealed at the conclusion of this case, and to think critically about how blame is assigned to
17
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

victims of sex crimes and the corresponding perpetrators. Using Kenneth Burke’s pentad as a

tool allowed this case to be seen for what it really was: a product of a system still struggling to

find justice in cases of sexual offenses.

 18
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

References

Arkin, D. (2018, June 5). Voters recall California judge who sentenced Brock Turner. Retrieved

October 20, 2019, from NBC News website: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-

persky-recall-brock-turner-lenient-sex-offender-sentecing-n880361

Burke, K. (1969). A grammar of motives. University of California Press.

CNN, J. G. and E. G. (2016, September 4). Mad about Brock Turner’s sentence? It’s not uncommon.

Retrieved October 22, 2019, from CNN website: https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/02/us/brock-

turner-college-athletes-sentence/index.html

Court documents: Stanford rape case. (n.d.). Retrieved October 1, 2019, from Latimes.com website:

http://documents.latimes.com/stanford-brock-turner/

Freitas, D. (2018). Consent on Campus: A Manifesto. Oxford University Press.

French, S. L., & Brown, S. C. (2011). It’s All Your Fault: Kenneth Burke, Symbolic Action, and the

Assigning of Guilt and Blame to Women. Southern Communication Journal, 76(1), 1–16.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10417940903419235

Georgantopoulos, M. A. (2016, July 19). Brock Turner’s Lawyer Asked The Stanford Victim About

Her Drinking Habits. Retrieved October 22, 2019, from BuzzFeed News website:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/maryanngeorgantopoulos/brock-turners-lawyer-asked-

the-stanford-victim-about-her-dri

Germain, L. J. (2016). Campus Sexual Assault: College Women Respond. Johns Hopkins University

Press.

Hamilton, M. (2016, March 31). Former Stanford swimmer convicted of sexually assaulting

unconscious woman on campus. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from

 19
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-former-stanford-swimmer-convicted-sexually-

assault-20160330-story.html

Hauser, C. (2018, August 9). Brock Turner Loses Appeal to Overturn Sexual Assault Conviction. The

New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/09/us/brock-turner-

appeal.html

Kadvany, E. (2016, June 12). County releases Brock Turner court documents. Palo Alto Online.

Retrieved from https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/06/10/county-releases-brock-turner-court-

documents

Keneally, M. (2017, September 15). Textbook showing Brock Turner’s mug shot next to section on

rape will be revised, publisher says. Retrieved October 19, 2019, from ABC News website:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/textbook-showing-brock-turners-mug-shot-section-rape/story?

id=49845886

Knowles, H. (2016, March 22). Brock Turner trial continues in second week of testimony—The

Stanford Daily. Stanford Daily. Retrieved from

https://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/03/21/brock-turner-trial-continues-in-second-week-of-

testimony/

Levin, S., & Wong, J. C. (2016, June 8). Brock Turner’s statement blames sexual assault on Stanford

‘party culture.’ The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/us-

news/2016/jun/07/brock-turner-statement-stanford-rape-case-campus-culture

Medina, M. (2019, September 22). Chanel Miller Breaks Silence On Brock Turner Sexual Assault In

Interview, Memoir. Retrieved October 21, 2019, from CBS SF BayArea website:

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/09/22/chanel-miller-breaks-silence-on-brock-turner-

sexual-assault-in-interview-memoir/
 20
DEPICTING A SCENE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND BLAME

People v. Brock Allen Turner (7/9). (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2019, from Latimes.com website:

http://documents.latimes.com/people-v-brock-allen-turner-89/

People v. Brock Allen Turner (8/9). (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2019, from Latimes.com website:

https://documents.latimes.com/people-v-brock-allen-turner-79/

People v. Brock Allen Turner (9/9). (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2019, from Latimes.com website:

https://documents.latimes.com/people-v-brock-allen-turner-99/

Potter, S. (2017). Using Critical Discourse Analysis to Understand Power, Personal Agency and

Accountability in the Stanford Rape Case. Linguistics, 41, 1–31.

Randall, M. (2011). Sexual Assault Law, Credibility, and “Ideal Victims”: Consent, Resistance, and

Victim Blaming. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 22.

https://doi.org/10.3138/cjwl.22.2.397

Sangal, A. (2019, November 29). Brock Turner case: Chanel Miller says her assault reflects a culture

of ’male sexual entitlement’—CNN. Retrieved November 29, 2019, from CNN website:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/us/chanel-miller-brock-turner-assault-book-stanford-

cnntv/index.html

Stack, L. (2016, June 6). Light Sentence for Brock Turner in Stanford Rape Case Draws Outrage. The

New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/07/us/outrage-in-stanford-

rape-case-over-dueling-statements-of-victim-and-attackers-father.html