When Chanel Miller came forward as the victim in the infamous Stanford sexual assault case, many people were left wondering why she was referred to as “Emily Doe” in court documents and media coverage. The answer is a complicated one that speaks to the challenges faced by survivors of sexual assault.
What Happened
In 2015, Brock Turner, a student at Stanford University, sexually assaulted Chanel Miller behind a dumpster on campus. Turner was caught in the act by two passing cyclists who intervened and detained him until police arrived. Miller was taken to the hospital and underwent a rape kit exam, which provided evidence of Turner’s assault.
The Trial
Turner was arrested and charged with three counts of sexual assault. However, during his trial, he was only convicted of two counts of felony sexual assault. The judge in the case, Aaron Persky, sentenced Turner to just six months in jail – a sentence that many felt was woefully insufficient given the severity of his crime.
Why “Emily Doe”?
Throughout her trial and its aftermath, Miller was referred to as “Emily Doe” in court documents and media coverage. This was not her real name – rather, it was a pseudonym that she chose to protect her privacy.
Miller’s decision to use a pseudonym speaks to the stigma and shame often experienced by survivors of sexual assault. Many survivors fear being publicly identified and facing judgment or backlash from others who may not believe their stories or blame them for what happened.
Using a pseudonym can also provide some level of protection from harassment or retaliation by those who may be angry about the survivor coming forward. Miller’s decision to use a pseudonym allowed her to maintain some level of control over her story and protect herself from further harm.
The Power of Her Voice
Despite being referred to as “Emily Doe,” Chanel Miller’s voice and impact have been anything but anonymous. In 2019, she published a memoir called “Know My Name” that details her experience as a survivor of sexual assault and the flawed legal system that often fails to protect victims.
Miller’s book has been praised for its powerful message of hope and resilience, as well as its indictment of a legal system that often prioritizes the rights of perpetrators over those of survivors.
Conclusion
In the end, Chanel Miller’s decision to use a pseudonym speaks to the challenges faced by survivors of sexual assault. But it also speaks to the power of her voice and her determination to use her story to effect change in how we understand and respond to sexual violence.
Through her writing and advocacy work, Miller has become an important voice in the fight against sexual assault – reminding us all that even in the face of trauma and injustice, our voices can still be powerful tools for change.