Annotated Bibliography

“Quarterly Report.” Montana Attorney General’s Office, Department of Justice. January 2015. Retrieved from.

The Montana Attorney General’s Office does a quarterly report that articulates problems in Montana, specific counties that have problems, and tries to figure out how to better serve its citizens. In this particular report, the problem with sexual assault in Montana is brought up and the General’s Office reports that Anne Munch, a nationally renowned expert on issues surrounding sexual assault cases, has been hired to try and tackle the problem. This can be used to back up a concluding statement about what is being done in Missoula, or Montana as a whole.

Krakauer quotes a journalist, Katie Baker, who writes for Jezebel.com, a free-forum publishing website focused on celebrity, sex, and fashion for women. Although Baker’s writing is mostly unbiased, it doesn’t seem this website is much of a credible source. First, the article is about women, for women, meaning it has an inherent bias about men anyways. Second, these are journalists who are obviously passionate about the topics they choose to write about, causing even more bias. Lastly, the authors of the posts can comment back, almost like a blog, which kind of takes away from their credibility. For example, Baker replies to a comment from a viewer that says “I'm betting that the victim blaming will start on the first paragraph. "Oh, she knew he had been drinking? And dared to take him to her house? Well, what was she expecting?!" by saying “Yep. Add that to the fact that they knew each other for a year prior to the incident — I'm sure that will make it harder for people to take it seriously. Because rapists are always scary strangers who jump out of the bushes, not football player pals.” She just showed her bias and, therefore, becomes incredible to me. Instead, to talk about the Jordan Johnson sexual assault case, Krakauer could have used this article.

Miller, M. E. “Montana quarterback receives $245K settlement for university’s ‘unfair and biased’ rape investigation.” The Washington Post. 17 February, 2014. Retrieved from.

This article updates people on the Johnson case, which ended in his acquittal. He received $245,000 as a settlement for the unfair trial he was given. This can be used in an argument about rape because it shows how unfair trials can tarnish someone’s reputation, career, and pocket. It can also be used to argue against because he could have used his status as a star quarterback to get his case overturned. Either way, this article is a good resource to use when talking about the resolution of cases and whether case outcomes are fair and just.

“Response to Rape (SIWOC) and Sexual Assaults.” Missoula Police Department Policy Manual. 15 November, 2013. Retrieved from.

This document articulates the regulations that come after a sexual intercourse without consent (SIWOC) or sexual assault has been reported. The article details everything from what the police is supposed to do to for the victim and about the perpetrator and what questions to ask each of them to how to collect the evidence. This could be used to either support or not support the interviewing and evidence collection for any of the cases in the book or that someone will research.

Robbins, Jim. “Montana Football Team at Center of Inquiry Into Sexual Assaults.” The New York Times. 22 May, 2012. Retrieved from.

This particular article states many facts about sexual assaults in Missoula. It talks about how 9 rapes were reported between 2010 and 2011, and when that fact was brought to light, 2 more came forward. It also brings up a gang rape case from December 2010 by 4 football players and 1 non-football player, as well as the Beau Donaldson rape case. These can be used to strengthen the case that sexual assault is a huge problem in Missoula and that when people come forward, more victims will also share their experiences.

Missoula: Chapter 13&14

In chapter 13 of Missoula we find out that Beau Donaldson's bail on his rape charge was reduced from $100,000 to $50,000 (p. 263). This 50% reduction made it twice as likely that Donaldson could make bail, which he did end up doing. This caused me to wonder what the average bail is set at in Missoula for rape cases, particularly around 2010, when Donaldson was being charged. It seems the trend is that if the man is over 18 and the girl is under 18, the rape charge is taken a lot more seriously. An 18-year-old boy raped a 16-year-old girl and his bail was set at $75,000. A 40-year-old man raped a 13-year-old girl and his bail was set at $100,000. I'm no lawyer and I'm not saying it isn't bad for a 40-year-old man to rape a 13-year-old girl, but it doesn't make closer-age rape less hard on the victim. The fact that Donaldson was first given $100,000 bail and then it was reduced to $50,000 sends a message that his rape was less serious and he is, therefore, less of a threat to society.

Aside from the topic of age gap between the rapist and victim, serial rape is also something to talk about. Donaldson's case became a little more serious when Hillary McLaughlin's story came to light. Krakauer writes: "as David Lisa has noted, persuading a jury to convict a serial rapist is a lot easier than convicting someone who's under suspicion of committing only a single rape" (p. 264). So what does this say about how society views rapists? Rapists seem to get a pass if they "only convict once." Now, I'm wondering, why is this not the case with murderers? If someone murders one victim, they are not given a light sentence until they prove they are a problem and deserve a harsher sentence. They are given a harsh sentence because they did a harsh crime and deserve to be punished accordingly. This makes me curious about how many rape victims come out after another person has been raped by their rapist. As I was talking about before, Hillary McLaughlin came forward (with the help of Sharon Mortimer, but still) after Allison Huguet's case became popular. This not only strengthened Huguet's case against Donaldson, but also gave McLaughlin some closure she hadn't realized she needed. But what about other rape victims that don't feel comfortable confronting their rapist until they are accused by another victim? The "U.S. Department of Justice estimates 110,000 women between the ages of 18 and 24 are raped annually, and that 80 percent of rapes are unreported." This is a problem because that means 88,000 women are raped annually and do not report it. In 2008, the year Donaldson tried to rape McLaughlin, there were 17 reported rapes committed in Missoula. That means there were actually 85 rapes, reported and unreported, one being McLaughlin's.

In the case of McLaughlin and Donaldson's (although McLaughlin never pressed charges), one of the defendants of Donaldson was Sharon Mortimer, one of his seemingly close friends. Mortimer defended Donaldson saying he would never rape or try to rape someone and that McLaughlin was flirting with Donaldson the whole night, even inviting him upstairs with her. Whether McLaughlin was flirting or not, that does not mean she wants to engage in sexual intercourse, but that is besides my point here. What I'm getting at is no one that wasn't friends with Donaldson came to his defense. Donaldson's only defender was someone who couldn't see the bad in him because it was her close friend, someone she showed up to the party with. What does kind of change things a bit is that Donaldson's defender, Mortimer, is female. Having a female protect a rapist who raped another female is a bit of a game-changer. Women empowering other women has been a strong case for quite some time, and to have a woman go against another woman who is claiming rape is kind of a bold statement, in my opinion. If a man had come to Donaldson's defense, I don't think it would be as strong as if the woman did. On the other hand, a man going against Donaldson would be just as effective as a woman defending Donaldson. In the recent case of Brock Turner, the Stanford University student who raped an unconscious woman, two Swedish graduate students were the witnesses against Turner. Having two witnesses who were unbiased because they didn't know either the perpetrator or the victim strengthened their testimony and helped convict Turner much faster than if the witnesses had been friends with either side of the case (rapist or victim).

Chapter 14

• "According to Montana state law, the maximum sentence for a person convicted of sexual intercourse without consent (SIWOC) is incarceration in the state prison for one hundred years" (p. 278-279).
• "[if] no serious bodily injury was inflicted on the victim-the minimum sentence could include no prison time at all" (p. 278).
• "From 2001 through the first three months of 2012, sixty-seven men had been convicted of SIWOC in Missoula County" (p. 278). Source?
• "In the other twenty-one cases (out of 67), the sentences included no incarceration whatsoever" (p. 278). 
• "Milt Datsopoulos was a skilled criminal attorney with a long history of winning rape cases" (p. 285).
• "Consider the environment in Missoula. Beau had been a celebrated and beloved hometown high school football star who now played for the Grizzlies" (p. 285).
• "Beau's poor family. Remember that they're victims as well. Beau's actions have caused them significant financial herm and emotional harm" (p. 288).

Missoula: Considering the Act

"Is there an act to be considered?" is a great question to ask when any rape is brought to attention. Should you automatically believe the victim, the perpetrator, or do neither of those exist? Throughout Missoula, defense attorneys, defendants, and defenders of defendants try to play this question out when referring to their case. For most rape victim activists, this question does not even enter their mind. It's hard to believe that a victim would make up a story just for attention, although I realize that this does occur on occasion (a very small, almost never occurring occasion). If the victim is automatically questioned for validity, what is this telling this victim and future victims? That they will always be questioned if their act happened? Maybe this is why the number of reported rapes is much smaller than the number of rapes that actually occur.

In chapter 11 of Missoula, Krakauer explains that a rape case including Beau Donaldson (perpetrator) and Allison Huguet (victim) covered the newspapers, along with other rape cases, for six months. This means that rape was occurring fairly often, and actually being reported, probably because Huguet decided to tell the police about her experience with Donaldson. Krakauer goes on to say that two victims, Kerry Berrett and Kaitlynn Kelly, were being ignored by the police and their perpetrators were not being prosecuted. The police refused to validate their stories and considered too highly on the perpetrator's end of the spectrum, ignoring the fact that this could have happened and only focussing on the possibility that it didn't happen and they might indict someone who is innocent.

In chapter 12, Cecilia Washburn reported a rape by Jordan Johnson. Washburn was urged by her friend to go to the Women's clinic, where she did end up going and received an exam that could be used in a court case against Johnson. The exam was painful and showed obvious signs of sexual assault. The police decided to send a formal letter to the assailant, Jordan Johnson, and invite him to be expelled if he was found guilty. In this case, the police did not consider if this crime happened or not; they believed Washburn as a credible being and allowed for her perpetrator to be called to court.

So, in what case are rape victims deemed credible or not? Why are some victims believed over others? Krakauer doesn't really go into detail about that, but he does provide sufficient evidence about what makes a case stronger against another case. For instance, Washburn was taken straight to he Women's clinic and checked out for injuries and/or Male DNA. But to what extent is a victim blamed just for telling their story? If a victim comes forward to a police station, why aren't they given the same respect as, say, a person who reports a car stolen? Why is rape such a hard thing to believe?....

Rape & PTSD

In class today, one of the interesting topics brought up was the question: what can rape be compared to in regards to PTSD? We talked about the fact that PTSD is caused by exposure to severe trauma, sometimes even if that trauma is second-hand, but for this instance I am talking about first-hand trauma. When we think of PTSD, the first large group of people we think about are war survivors. Seeing war is something that can be severely traumatizing because of what you see first-hand or what you experience physically first-hand. In the case of a rape, the victim experiences first-hand physical experience as well as the trauma for visually remembering what happened to them, something that can be played over and over in their heads.

Another aspect of rape cases that was talked about in class was the idea of *tonic immobility. My thoughts on this topic are that tonic immobility can cause victims to not make loud enough noises that could possibly help them. This tonic immobility is proof that the experience they are going through is extremely traumatic, traumatic enough to paralyze the victim and cause them the inability to function naturally.




*Tonic immobility is a natural state of paralysis in which animals enter as a reaction to extreme fear.

Missoula & Pathos

The appeal to emotion within Missoula is hard to dismiss. The emotion the reader feels is undoubtedly guilt for the rape victims, but the defense team's use of pathos to justify the rapists' actions is just as compelling (but not believable). Krakauer quotes a detective that was talking to an accuse rapist that said "we have a lot of cases where girls come in and report stuff they are not sure about, and then it becomes rape." This kind of talk is not uncommon in police questioning/reporting. If this were the investigator talking to the rape victim, I'm certain that the conversation would have gone more like: "Are you sure you were raped? You didn't elude to wanting sexual intercourse at any point? You know.. many men are accused of rape when it's falsely reported. You must be 100% sure to report this." This kind of double-standard talking tells the victim that their problem doesn't matter, and the perpetrator that his crime may not be a crime. By talking to the perpetrator that his act is not uncommon and that people bringing up his heinous act and getting away with it is not uncommon is telling him that he can really get away with whatever he wants. Also, if a rapist heard this kind of jargon, he probably would continue to rape if he got away with it.

Krakauer talks about the comparison between rape victims and victims of other crimes when he says "because the legal system stacks the deck more heavily against sexual-assault victims than victims of other crimes, it’s easier to keep the whole truth from coming out." He brought up this point without a statistic or source backing him up, but I think anyone who reads the news or knows about sexual assault and rape, knows that this statement is most definitely true. The whole "innocent until proven guilty" is seemingly only applicable to the alleged perpetrator. The victim is given almost the opposite treatment. The person coming forward with a rape story is often seen as a liar until proven truthful with either a witness testimony, an exam that proves they were assaulted, or the rapist comes clean. Why is it that the victims are so often blamed and the rapists are protected for so long?

The show *"Law & Order: SVU" may be fictional, but unfortunately describes very real acts of violence, sometimes even using actual cases. When reading this book, it's hard for me to distance the crimes I've seen on SVU from the cases. The way victims are treated perpetuates this notion that something in the justice system needs to change on sexual assaults because victims are ignored far too long and feel that the system has failed them. Often times they have a disregard for police after the fact, and this has an effect on future sexual assault victims. If it's so easy to report a stolen car, or a house robbery, it should be easy (in the way that police believe you, not emotionally easy) to report an assault that happened to a human body.

*If anyone wants to watch an episode of Law and Order: SVU that actually deals with campus rapes, watch Season 14, episode 20: Girl Dishonored on Netflix.

Missoula: Victims & Rapists

The victims and rapists obviously act much different in cases of rape. The victims feel withdrawn, scared, hurt, and sometimes even numb, while the rapists feel no remorse until they are on trial, and then they feel upset (about themselves), "confused," and sometimes guilty. Within Missoula, it's easy to see the difference between the way the victims and rapists act when the different experiences of rape is brought to light. Although it's obvious that they would act different, it's interesting to see how they act. Sometimes the rapists even act more upset than the victims, which is just ludicrous.

In the case of Allison and Beau Donaldson, it's easy to see the differences in their acts. Allison's friend recalls Allison's actions right after her rape when she says: “I remember Allison sitting on the couch down in the basement of my house, wrapped in blankets. She wasn’t saying anything, but you could see it looping in her mind. You could see it in her face” (p. 55). Allison was clearly withdrawn, in shock, and felt weird in her own body after this rape. To make matters work, she was probably confused at why someone she knew from childhood would do something like this to her. A little later on, Allison says: "“If I hadn’t grown up with you,” Allison said, “if I wasn’t one of your friends— If you had done this to some random girl, and she walks down to the police station and tells them, your whole life is ruined, Beau….” (p. 52). In this case, Allison is taking a bit of responsibility for this rape and justifying the fact that it was better it happened to her, someone who knew Beau, rather than a random girl. In this case, Allison feels a bit guilty that she was the girl that Beau had sex with raped and, in doing so, cheated on his girlfriend with. It seems as though Allison is placing blame on herself as to not hate her childhood friend, and to speak for Beau's past and future victims.

On the other hand, Beau acts much differently. “Donaldson said he understood. “I just about killed myself that night,” he claimed. After he quit chasing Allison down the alley, he said, “I curled up in my truck in the carport with my fucking handgun in my hand.” (p. 51). In this case, Donaldson is playing the victim and acting like his actions after his rape matter. The pathos he is trying to portray is misguided because, instead, it makes me as a reader feel disgust and anger that he thinks his pain matters. His pain is towards the fact that he couldn't help himself and is therefor a rapist, not towards his victim that he just raped in his sleep. Not all rapists and victims have this encounter, but this one was remarkably displeasing to me as a reader.