Speaker 1: Welcome back to playing Dirty sports Scandals. I'm your host
Speaker 1: in scandal swiller Jay Harris. Last week's Brew was incredibly
Speaker 1: dark as we started the story of Brock Turner, a
Speaker 1: promising All American swimmer at Stanford whose life took a
Speaker 1: dark turn after a sexual assault allegation. Tragically, his decision
Speaker 1: the fateful night of January seventeenth, twenty fifteen didn't just
Speaker 1: unravel his own life, it shattered his victim, Chanelle Miller's world.
Speaker 1: Chanelle and lead prosecutor Alilai kean air Set were determined
Speaker 1: for Brock to pay the price for her broken life, and,
Speaker 1: as she would later pen Chanelle believed it when they
Speaker 1: told you that if you're assaulted, there's a kingdom, a courthouse,
Speaker 1: high up on a mountain where justice can be found.
Speaker 1: But would Chanell find justice then? On February second, twenty fifteen,
Speaker 1: Brock Turner was arraigned at the Santa Clara County Courthouse,
Speaker 1: where he pled not guilty to all the charges against him,
Speaker 1: two charges of felony sexual assault and one charge of
Speaker 1: attempted rape. Judge Aaron Persky, who had graduated Phi Beta
Speaker 1: Kappa from Stanford University and had been captain of the
Speaker 1: Stanford men's lacrosse team, was presiding. The courtroom itself was
Speaker 1: packed with spectators, journalists, and supporters both for Chanel and Brock.
Speaker 1: The prosecution had a solid case against Brock Turner, with
Speaker 1: substantial evidence pointing to his guilt. Key testimonies from the eyewitnesses,
Speaker 1: Swedish graduate students Carl Frederick Arendt and Peter Johnson, and
Speaker 1: forensic experts were all brought before the jury to make
Speaker 1: clear brock wrongdoing. Carl, Frederick and Peter recounted stopping their bikes,
Speaker 1: confronting Brock, and ultimately tackling him to the ground while
Speaker 1: trying unsuccessfully to rouse an unconscious Chanel. Christine Sedederland, the
Speaker 1: veteran Sexual Assault Response Team START nurse who had conducted
Speaker 1: Chanell's physical at Valley Medical Center the morning of January eighteenth,
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen, testified to the abrasions and arithema, which is
Speaker 1: redness on the skin, that had been on various parts
Speaker 1: of Chanel's body. Christine said these injuries indicated significant trauma,
Speaker 1: including penetrating trauma, and explained that the arithema could be
Speaker 1: compared to the redness that would appear after a person
Speaker 1: is slapped. When defense attorney Mike Armstrong tried to discredit
Speaker 1: Christine Sedederland, suggesting that the information provided to her by
Speaker 1: the police prior to the exam might have influenced her observations,
Speaker 1: she shot him down, stating, we don't only go with
Speaker 1: what the victim says or what the police say. When
Speaker 1: Attorney Armstrong pressed her further, pointedly asking if the injuries
Speaker 1: spoke for themselves, Christine settled and calmly responded, yes, they did.
Speaker 1: But even with the strength of the prosecution's third party testimony,
Speaker 1: it was undoubtedly Chanell Miller's own voice that resonated most
Speaker 1: powerfully in brock Turner's trial, Although she went by Emily
Speaker 1: Doe to protect her identity during the proceedings, Chanell's testimony
Speaker 1: of going out the chaperone her sister Tiffany, drinking too
Speaker 1: much too quickly and losing consciousness, only to wake up
Speaker 1: in a confusing hell at the hospital, covered in pine needles,
Speaker 1: wounded and without any underwear struck a nerve with women nationwide.
Speaker 1: Chanell Miller did not remember meeting brock Turner, let alone
Speaker 1: leaving the party with him. She did not remember the
Speaker 1: thirty minute ambulance ride to the hospital after the assault,
Speaker 1: Prosecutor Kean Airsi held up a series of photographs taken
Speaker 1: of Chanelle arriving at the hospital strapped onto a backboard
Speaker 1: with pine needles strewn throughout her hair. Chanell testified that
Speaker 1: she was unaware the photographs had even been taken. Chanelle
Speaker 1: had clearly, by her own account and confirmed by medical professionals,
Speaker 1: been unconscious and therefore physically unable to give consent for
Speaker 1: sexual activity. Realizing that a gamble was necessary to counter
Speaker 1: the prosecution's extremely strong case, attorney Mike Armstrong decided that
Speaker 1: rock Turner himself should take the stand. Now, having a
Speaker 1: defendant take the stand is like flipping a coin for
Speaker 1: an attorney. According to Jeffrey Bellen, a William and Mary
Speaker 1: Law School professor and jury researcher, only about fifty percent
Speaker 1: of defendants testify at their own criminal trial because the
Speaker 1: risk of a good prosecutor ripping a defendant to pieces
Speaker 1: during cross examination is high. However, brock Turner's benign appearance
Speaker 1: and white collar background made it a chance worth taking.
Speaker 1: He appealed to the jury, painting himself as a victim
Speaker 1: rather than a perpetrator. The contracost Oft Times reported that
Speaker 1: Brock Turner told the jury of four women and eight
Speaker 1: men that he didn't understand carled, Frederick's and Peter's concern
Speaker 1: when they first approached him, But when one of the
Speaker 1: graduate students tried to put him in a headlock to
Speaker 1: subdue him, Brock said, that made me really scared. I
Speaker 1: decided to run. Then when Peter tackled him, Brock told
Speaker 1: the jury, I started screaming for help. Brock recounted how
Speaker 1: he heard Peter asking him, do you think this is okay,
Speaker 1: but said that he had no idea what he was
Speaker 1: talking about. It just seemed like he hated me or something.
Speaker 1: Brock insisted that Chanell had been awake and conscious the
Speaker 1: whole time, and when his lawyer asked him if he
Speaker 1: intended to raper, Rock firmly replied absolutely not. Throughout his testimony,
Speaker 1: he Brock maintained that he didn't realize Chanelle Miller had
Speaker 1: been unconscious and insisted that he would never have taken
Speaker 1: advantage of someone in such a state the entire time
Speaker 1: I was with her. If she was ever unconscious, I
Speaker 1: would have gone for help. Brock insisted further Brock claimed
Speaker 1: he was someone unaccustomed to the party lifestyle who would
Speaker 1: naturally be unused to hooking up in an intoxicated state. Responsibly,
Speaker 1: he described how he came from a small town in
Speaker 1: Ohio where he didn't drink much and hardly ever partied.
Speaker 1: Brock said his behavior on the night of January seventeenth,
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen, was due to the drinking and party culture
Speaker 1: at Stanford. Quote. Before this happened, I never had any
Speaker 1: trouble with law enforcement, and I plan on maintaining that,
Speaker 1: Brock said, I've been shattered by the party culture and
Speaker 1: risk taking behavior that I briefly experienced in my four
Speaker 1: months at school. It was Here's a bold statement from
Speaker 1: the fallen swimmer, and one which was readily countered by
Speaker 1: the prosecution, which presented text messages from Brock's phone during
Speaker 1: high school painting a very different story. This evidence demonstrated
Speaker 1: unequivocally that Brock Turner had engaged in partying, drinking, and
Speaker 1: even drug use during high school, totally undermining his claim
Speaker 1: of inexperience. Prosecutor Kean Aircy showed the jury that the
Speaker 1: text messages on Brock's phone referenced doing acid or tried
Speaker 1: to find a hookup to purchase acid, both in high
Speaker 1: school and while at Stanford. Even more damning was a
Speaker 1: December twenty fourteen video allegedly showing Brock smoking from a
Speaker 1: bong and drinking out of a liquor bottle, as well
Speaker 1: as numerous references in his text messages to smoking, buying,
Speaker 1: and sharing marijuana from the time he was nineteen at least,
Speaker 1: and certainly before he ever attended Stanford. One text exchange
Speaker 1: with his sister Caroline in June twenty fourteen stood out
Speaker 1: for its explicitness. In it, Caroline asked, did you rage
Speaker 1: last night? And Brock responded, yeah, kind of. It was
Speaker 1: hard to find a place to drink, but when we
Speaker 1: finally did, we could only drink for like an hour
Speaker 1: and a half. It wasn't just Brock's insistence of innocence
Speaker 1: regarding alcohol and drug use that prosecutor alile Kian Ers
Speaker 1: tore apart. She also presented clear evidence that the defense's
Speaker 1: main argument was false, that Chanelle Miller had provided consent.
Speaker 1: The jury was presented with photographs of Chanelle curled up
Speaker 1: in a fetal position on the ground, surrounded by firefighters
Speaker 1: and medics. Treating her on the night of January fifteenth,
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen. Alice King, the supervisor of the Santa Clara
Speaker 1: County Crime Labs Toxicology Unit, testified about the mental and
Speaker 1: physical impairments. Someone at Chanel's level of intoxication would exhibit,
Speaker 1: reinforcing that she Dannell had almost certainly been incapable of
Speaker 1: providing consent. And then there was an incomprehensible voicemail. Chanelle
Speaker 1: Miller left her boyfriend in Philadelphia at twelve fifteen am
Speaker 1: on the night of the assault, driving home her total
Speaker 1: lack of functionality under the influence. The jury also heard
Speaker 1: from Carl Frederick Arndt and Peter Johnson, whose intervention and
Speaker 1: brock Turner's attempt to flee the scene painted a starkly
Speaker 1: different picture to the one the defense had painted. Had Brock,
Speaker 1: an athlete, really been terrified of two Swedish graduate students
Speaker 1: checking on a young woman's well being, It seemed far fetched,
Speaker 1: and seasoned prosecutors view a defendant fleeing as a real
Speaker 1: consciousness of guilt moment. This isn't just interpretation. Consciousness of
Speaker 1: guilt is a type of admissible, circumstantial evidence that juries
Speaker 1: may consider when determining whether it defended is guilty. There's
Speaker 1: actually passage in the Bible, Proverbs twenty eight to one
Speaker 1: that encapsulates this concept. Guilty men flee where no one pursues,
Speaker 1: while the righteous stands bold as the lion. While brock
Speaker 1: Turner certainly wasn't a lion. On the night of January seventeenth,
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen, the prosecution had made a compelling case for
Speaker 1: him being a predator. The jury was left to deliberate. Now,
Speaker 1: before we head back to court, I recommend you sip up.
Speaker 1: This case has an aftertaste, and for most it's a
Speaker 1: bitter one. Enjoy your juice while you can't. Okay. Fast
Speaker 1: forward to March thirtieth, twenty sixteen, when the jury reconvened
Speaker 1: to declare that they'd found brock Turner guilty on three
Speaker 1: counts of felony sexual assault. Justice had prevailed or not,
Speaker 1: you see, it turned out not to be so straightforward.
Speaker 1: After the jury announced its guilty determination, it was time
Speaker 1: for Judge Aaron Persky to preside over Brock's sentencing hearing.
Speaker 1: The prosecution naturally argued for a substantial prison sentence, emphasizing
Speaker 1: the severity of the crime and the lasting impact it
Speaker 1: had had and would continue to have on Chanelle Miller.
Speaker 1: Prosecutor alile Kianairci recommended a sentence of six years in
Speaker 1: state prison, aiming to set a precedent that would deter
Speaker 1: future sexual assaults, but the defense had other plans. While
Speaker 1: attorney Mike Johnson had already done his best to position
Speaker 1: Brock as a contrite young man with a promising future,
Speaker 1: Brock now had an opportunity to address the court directly
Speaker 1: before his sentencing was concluded. His eleven page statement reiterated
Speaker 1: that he had made an alcohol fueled mistake rather than
Speaker 1: perpetrated an intentional sexual assault, and he emphasized that time
Speaker 1: behind bars was unnecessary. Brock said, I am completely consumed
Speaker 1: by my poor judgment and ill thought actions. There isn't
Speaker 1: a second that has gone by where I haven't regretted
Speaker 1: the course of events I took on January seventeenth and eighteenth.
Speaker 1: My shell and core of who I am as a
Speaker 1: person is forever broken from this. I am a changed
Speaker 1: person at this point in my life. I never want
Speaker 1: to have a drop of alcohol again. I never want
Speaker 1: to attend a social gathering that involves alcohol. Or any
Speaker 1: situation where people make decisions based on the substances they
Speaker 1: have consumed. I never want to experience being in a
Speaker 1: position where it will have a negative impact on my
Speaker 1: life or someone else's. Ever again, I've lost two jobs
Speaker 1: solely based on the reporting of my case. I wish
Speaker 1: I never was good at swimming or had the opportunity
Speaker 1: to attend Stanford, so maybe the newspapers wouldn't want to
Speaker 1: write stories about me. All I can do from these
Speaker 1: events moving forward is by proving to everyone who I
Speaker 1: really am as a person. I know that that if
Speaker 1: I were to be placed on probation, I would be
Speaker 1: able to be a benefit to society for the rest
Speaker 1: of my life. Brock Turner's statement did little to sway
Speaker 1: public opinion. His words were viewed by most as an
Speaker 1: attempt to minimize his responsibility and deflect blame onto external factors,
Speaker 1: rather than taking full accountability for his actions. After all,
Speaker 1: the prosecution had already dismantled his narrative of being a
Speaker 1: naive and inexperienced young man, presenting copious evidence of partying, drinking,
Speaker 1: and drug use long before the night of the attack
Speaker 1: on Chanelle Miller. A statement from Brock's father, Dan Turner,
Speaker 1: ignited additional public disgust. In his letter to Judge Persky,
Speaker 1: Dan argued for leniency, saying quote, Brock's life has been
Speaker 1: deeply altered forever by the events of January seventeenth and eighteenth.
Speaker 1: His every waking minute is consumed with worry, anxiety, fear,
Speaker 1: and depression. You can see this in his face, the
Speaker 1: way he walks, his weakened voice, his lack of appetite.
Speaker 1: Brock always enjoyed certain types of food and is a
Speaker 1: very good cook himself. I was always excited to buy
Speaker 1: him a big Ribbi steak to grill, or to get
Speaker 1: his favorite snack for him. I had to make sure
Speaker 1: to hide some of my favorite pretzels or chips because
Speaker 1: I knew they wouldn't be around long after Brock walked
Speaker 1: in from a long swim practice. Now he barely consumes
Speaker 1: any food and eats only to exist. These verdicts have
Speaker 1: broken and shattered him in our family in so many ways.
Speaker 1: His life will never be the one that he dreamed
Speaker 1: about and work so hard to achieve. That is a
Speaker 1: steep price to pay for twenty minutes of action out
Speaker 1: of his twenty plus years of life. Hmmm. Worrying about
Speaker 1: Brock for losing his appetite for steak and pretzels after
Speaker 1: committing an unconscionable sexual assault seemed entirely dismissive of Chanelle
Speaker 1: Miller's deep suffering. Dan Turner's statement instantly became a symbol
Speaker 1: of the privilege and entitlement many people feel that characterized
Speaker 1: Brock's defense. Notably, John Pavlovitz, a pastor, blogger and father
Speaker 1: in wake Forest, North Carolina, wrote Dan Turner a note
Speaker 1: of his own entitled to Brock, Turner's father from another father.
Speaker 1: In it, John told Dan quote, I need you to
Speaker 1: understand something, and I say this as a father who
Speaker 1: dearly loves my son as much as you must love yours.
Speaker 1: Brock is not the victim here. His victim is the victim.
Speaker 1: She is the wounded one. He is the damager. She
Speaker 1: will endure the unthinkable trauma of his twenty minutes of
Speaker 1: action for the duration of her lifetime. And the fact
Speaker 1: that you seem unaware of this fact is exactly why
Speaker 1: we have a problem. It's a problem that Chanell Miller
Speaker 1: addressed personally in her victim impact statement, addressing Brock with
Speaker 1: the words. You don't know me, but you've been inside me,
Speaker 1: and that's why we're here today. That's how I begin
Speaker 1: every day of my life, wondering where you are and
Speaker 1: what you'll do next, if you'll hurt someone else, what
Speaker 1: else you'll take away. I'm the victim of a sex crime.
Speaker 1: So instead of feeling guilty that you'll go to jail,
Speaker 1: I feel grateful, Grateful that the system worked, Grateful that
Speaker 1: my voice was heard, Grateful that you will learn from
Speaker 1: this and that it might deter others from committing the
Speaker 1: same crime. Chanelle's statement went viral, striking a chord with
Speaker 1: millions of women and drawing widespread attention to her case.
Speaker 1: Advocacy groups and celebrities praised her courage. Even then Vice
Speaker 1: President Joe Biden penned an open letter to Chanelle in
Speaker 1: which he wrote, you will save lives. You will change lives.
Speaker 1: You have already done so. But would Judge Aaron Persky
Speaker 1: take up the cause of sexual assault survivors? Would you
Speaker 1: throw the book look at brock Turner with up to
Speaker 1: a fourteen year prison sentence, or grant him leniency as
Speaker 1: requested by the defense. In June twenty sixteen, almost a
Speaker 1: year and a half after Chanelle Miller was brutally assaulted.
Speaker 1: Judge Persky's sentence brock Turner to just six months in
Speaker 1: county jail and three years of probation, citing Brock's age,
Speaker 1: lack of criminal history, and the potential impact the longest
Speaker 1: sentence would have on his life. A prison sentence would
Speaker 1: have a severe impact on him. I think he will
Speaker 1: not be a danger to others, Judge Persky stated during
Speaker 1: the sentencing. Shockingly, the judge also said that quote there
Speaker 1: is less moral culpability attached to the defendant who was
Speaker 1: legally intoxicated. In other words, Judge Persky rationalized that if
Speaker 1: someone is drunk and commits a crime, they shouldn't be
Speaker 1: held fully responsible for their actions under the law. His
Speaker 1: nonchalant determination shook the foundation of the judicial system, and
Speaker 1: ripples of outrage were swift and relentless. First, the jury raged,
Speaker 1: with one male juror writing to Judge Perskey that quote,
Speaker 1: after the guilty verdict, I expected that this case would
Speaker 1: serve as a very strong deterrent to on campus assault,
Speaker 1: But with the ridiculously lenient sentence that brock Turner received,
Speaker 1: I am afraid that it makes a mockery of the
Speaker 1: whole trial and the ability of the justice system to
Speaker 1: protect victims of assault and rape. Clearly, there are few
Speaker 1: to no consequences for a rapist, even if they are
Speaker 1: caught in the act of assaulting a defenseless, unconscious person.
Speaker 1: It seems to me that you really did not accept
Speaker 1: the jury's findings. We were unanimous in our finding of
Speaker 1: the defendant's guilt, and our verdicts were marginalized based on
Speaker 1: your own personal opinion. This punishment you've set does not
Speaker 1: fit the crime. Mister Turner, convicted of three fell accounts
Speaker 1: of sexual assault, will serve three months in county jail
Speaker 1: after serving the customary time of his six month sentence.
Speaker 1: Justice has not been served in this case. The jury's
Speaker 1: verdict of guilt on all three felony accounts of sexual
Speaker 1: assault was completely disregarded in an effort to spare the
Speaker 1: perpetrator a hardship. What message does this send to the
Speaker 1: victim and indeed all victims of sexual assault and rape,
Speaker 1: especially those on college campuses. Your concern was for the
Speaker 1: impact on the assailant. I vehemently disagree. Our concern should
Speaker 1: be for the victim. Shame on you. Judge Perski. For
Speaker 1: Judge Aaron Perski being shamed by the jurors was just
Speaker 1: the beginning. The Atlantic reported that the personal fallout was
Speaker 1: swift for Perski, whose office began receiving threatening phone calls.
Speaker 1: There was also an immediate online petition to recall Judge Perski,
Speaker 1: which collected one point two million signatures in an instant.
Speaker 1: The Santa Clara District Attorney's office filed a successful motion
Speaker 1: to stop Judge Persky from presiding over another sexual assault
Speaker 1: case within a week of brock Turner's sentencing, and by
Speaker 1: twenty eighteen, Judge Aaron Persky was simply Aaron Persky. He
Speaker 1: became the first judge in California to be recalled from
Speaker 1: the bench since nineteen thirty two. When he finally gained
Speaker 1: new employment in September twenty nineteen as a junior varsity
Speaker 1: girls tennis coach at Lynbrook High School in San Jose,
Speaker 1: his employment was terminated after just four days amidst community outcry.
Speaker 1: Society was sending a strong message. While Aaron Persky might
Speaker 1: tolerate sexual abuse and classism in the justice system, an
Speaker 1: overwhelming percentage of Americans were sick to death of it.
Speaker 1: So should Aaron Persky's recall from the bench be celebrated
Speaker 1: as a victory for justice. On the one hand, Stanford
Speaker 1: law professor Michelle Dauber argues yes, writing in The Washington Post,
Speaker 1: that it is the very fact that judges like Persky
Speaker 1: often exercised discretion in favor of defendants like brock Turner
Speaker 1: that preserves a system in which poor and minority defendants
Speaker 1: receive long sentences. Yet others disagreed with Professor Dauber, explaining
Speaker 1: that though Judge Persky's recall may field empowering, in practice,
Speaker 1: it's harmful. Retired judge Ldoris Cordell, a pioneering feminist and
Speaker 1: the first black woman judge in northern California, argued that
Speaker 1: recalling a judge for being lenient could have unintended consequences,
Speaker 1: such as undermining judicial independence and leading to more punitive sentencing,
Speaker 1: potentially harming black and Latino defendants. On the heels of
Speaker 1: Judge Cordell's warning, two political scientists from NYU and the
Speaker 1: University of Chicago actually conducted a study on the impact
Speaker 1: of the Aaron Persky recall campaign on criminal sentencing. Their
Speaker 1: research published in October twenty twenty revealed that judges began
Speaker 1: imposing sentences that were roughly thirty percent longer on average
Speaker 1: immediately after the recall campaign became public, and that much
Speaker 1: as Judge Cordell had feared, these increased sentences maintained pre
Speaker 1: existing racial disparities, disproportionately affecting black and Hispanic defendants. The
Speaker 1: study also found that the longer sentences were primarily imposed
Speaker 1: for non sexual and non violent crimes, raising questions about
Speaker 1: the impact of Aaron Persky's recall. As Aaron Persky came
Speaker 1: to grips with a new diminished reality following the Brock
Speaker 1: Turner trial, Brock himself prepared for a future without swimming.
Speaker 1: Right after his sentencing, USA Swimming, the national governing body
Speaker 1: for competitive swimming in the United States, issued a statement
Speaker 1: that he was ineligible for membership under their zero erotolerance
Speaker 1: policy for sexual misconduct. This meant Brock would never be
Speaker 1: allowed to compete in any USA Swimming sanctioned events, including
Speaker 1: the Olympic Trials, and so upon his release from jail
Speaker 1: on September second, twenty sixteen, Brock returned to his family's
Speaker 1: home in Dayton, Ohio. Reporters camped outside his house, and
Speaker 1: news outlets eagerly followed any updates about his post jail life.
Speaker 1: The intense public and media scrutiny made it difficult for
Speaker 1: Brock to reintegrate into society and resume any semblance of normalcy.
Speaker 1: In twenty eighteen, Brock tried to overturn his conviction through
Speaker 1: the appeals process, with his legal team arguing that the
Speaker 1: initial trial was unfair due to misleading statements made by
Speaker 1: the prosecution and incorrect jury instructions. However, the prosecution defended
Speaker 1: the original conviction without issue, and in August twenty eighteen,
Speaker 1: the appellate court rejected Brock Turner's appeal. He remains registered
Speaker 1: as a sex offender and is subject to ongoing monitoring
Speaker 1: by law enforcement for the rest of his life. As
Speaker 1: of twenty nineteen, The Daily Mail reported that Brock was
Speaker 1: working an entry level job at Tark Incorporated, a firm
Speaker 1: that manufactures cooling technology for medical appliances, earning twelve dollars
Speaker 1: an hour. A source at the company said he's really
Speaker 1: quiet and polite. He doesn't say much and he's not
Speaker 1: really chatty with anyone. He just keeps his head down
Speaker 1: and does his job. No problems. By twenty twenty two,
Speaker 1: Brockett moved into a house three minutes away from the
Speaker 1: University of Dayton. To the great ire of locals, there
Speaker 1: is actually a network of women who use Brock's status
Speaker 1: as a registered sex offender to keep one another safe.
Speaker 1: One post from this group, dubbed the Whisper Network reads,
Speaker 1: brock Turner is frequenting bars in the area. Do not
Speaker 1: let him leave with an intoxicated woman. Inform the women
Speaker 1: of who he is. In Form the bartender, the bouncers.
Speaker 1: Brock Turner does not belong in public. The swimming sensation,
Speaker 1: once destined for greatness, now lives forever in the shadow
Speaker 1: of his actions the night of January seventeenth, twenty fifteen.
Speaker 1: And while he goes by his middle name these days,
Speaker 1: Alan Turner rather than brock Turner, the public has a
Speaker 1: long and unforgiving memory where he is concerned. Meanwhile, Chanelle
Speaker 1: Miller began her own incredible journey towards healing and reclaiming
Speaker 1: her identity. While she did not publicly reveal her identity
Speaker 1: throughout the trial, going only by Emily Doe, on November first,
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, she was anonymously recognized as a Woman of
Speaker 1: the Year by Glamour magazine for changing the conversation about
Speaker 1: sexual assault forever. Chanell's impact statement had been read over
Speaker 1: eleven million times by then, highlighting the profound effect her
Speaker 1: words had on the public discourse. In twenty nineteen, buoyed
Speaker 1: by overwhelming public support, Chanell Miller decided to step forward
Speaker 1: at last and reveal her identity to the world on
Speaker 1: Sixty Minutes. The interview coincided with the publication of her memoir,
Speaker 1: Know My Name, which provides an unflinching look at her
Speaker 1: experience from the assault and trial to her path to recovery.
Speaker 1: Chanell's memoir was met with widespread acclaim. Praised for its honesty, eloquent,
Speaker 1: and powerful narrative, it became a bestseller, debuting at number
Speaker 1: two on the New York Times Bestseller List for nonfiction,
Speaker 1: and was lauded for shedding light on the realities of
Speaker 1: sexual assault. The memoir won several awards, including the National
Speaker 1: Book Critics Circle Award for Autobiography. In twenty nineteen, Oprah
Speaker 1: Winfrey selected Know My Name for her book club, calling
Speaker 1: it a searingly, beautifully written and courageous account of a
Speaker 1: survivor reclaiming her narrative and speaking out against injustice. Today,
Speaker 1: Chanelle Miller continues to be an advocate for justice and change.
Speaker 1: Her journey for from victim to survivor and activist serves
Speaker 1: as a powerful reminder of the strength of the human
Speaker 1: spirit and the importance of fighting for what is right.
Speaker 1: Keep up with her at chanel Dashmiller dot Com as
Speaker 1: she continues to make a difference. There's no doubt about it.
Speaker 1: The brock Turner scandal is a complex brew that continues
Speaker 1: to serve up stark reminders of the complexities and challenges
Speaker 1: in addressing sexual assault, with significant flaws in our justice
Speaker 1: system laid bare. No other case in recent memory has
Speaker 1: sparked such broad conversation about the treatment of survivors and
Speaker 1: accountability of perpetrators. Join me your host in Brave Maurista
Speaker 1: Jay Harris. Back here next week for another episode of
Speaker 1: Playing Dirty Sports Scandals. Playing Dirty Sports Scandals is a
Speaker 1: production of Dan Patrick, Predut Ductions, Never Ever Productions, and
Speaker 1: Workhouse Media from executive producers Dan Patrick, Paul Anderson, Nick Panella,
Speaker 1: Maya Glickman, and Jennifer Clary, Hosted by Jay Harris, Written
Speaker 1: and produced by Jen Brown, Francie Haiks, Maya Glickman, and
Speaker 1: Jennifer Clary