Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town

Pabst, a former prosecutor turned defense attorney, leverages her extensive courtroom experience to undermine Washburn’s credibility and portray Johnson as a virtuous, upstanding young man. Pabst paints Washburn as a deceitful woman with a history of mental health conditions who fabricated the rape accusation out of regret over the encounter and a desire for attention. Krakauer notes that Pabst’s defense strategy relies on character assassination and the omission of Johnson’s history of alcohol misuse, which was barred from being mentioned in court.

Pabst and Davis Paoli, her colleague in defending Johnson, aggressively continue seeking to discredit Cecilia Washburn, the victim. Krakauer critiques the adversarial nature of the American legal system, where defense attorneys are often encouraged to make misleading statements and engage in aggressive cross-examinations to cast doubt on the survivor’s testimony. Such legal strategies can have an emotional toll on survivors, particularly in cases of sexual assault, where the courtroom experience can exacerbate their trauma. Krakauer also underscores the ethical dilemmas faced by lawyers, who, while obligated to defend their clients zealously, often do so at the expense of truth and justice.

Dr. David Lisak, a clinical psychologist and expert on acquaintance rape, is called to testify at Johnson’s trial to provide educational testimony about common misconceptions surrounding rape and the psychological effects on survivors. His testimony aims to dispel the myth that rapists are easily identifiable or that survivors of non-stranger rape react in predictable ways. He emphasizes that rape can be committed by likable, sociable individuals and that survivors often experience profound confusion, fear, and self-blame. Pabst cross-examines Lisak, attempting to discredit his testimony by portraying him as a biased “intellectual” with a personal agenda. Pabst also tries to downplay the severity of non-stranger rape by conflating it with bad or awkward consensual sex. Despite her efforts, Lisak remains steadfast in his assertions about the complex psychological impact of rape on survivors.

Washburn’s housemate, Stephen Green, testifies about Washburn’s distress after the alleged rape, countering the defense’s claim that she was seeking attention. Nurse Claire Francoeur, who conducted the forensic examination of Washburn, is aggressively cross-examined by defense attorney Paoli, who attempts to undermine Francoeur’s credibility and the validity of her findings. Detective Connie Brueckner, the lead investigator, is also questioned at length, with the defense challenging the new Missoula Police Department policy that requires officers to believe survivors’ claims during initial investigations. Despite Paoli’s efforts, Brueckner defends the policy as essential for the sensitive and effective handling of sexual assault cases.

The defense begins with Michael McGowan, a chaplain for the University of Montana football team, who describes Johnson as respectful and self-controlled. However, under cross-examination, McGowan admits his understanding of psychological terms like “antisocial” and “narcissistic” is limited, weakening the impact of his testimony. Johnson then takes the stand, portraying himself as a reserved and respectful young man and describing the night of the alleged rape in a way that directly contradicts Washburn’s account. His testimony is followed by that of his father, Marty Johnson, who speaks emotionally about the close-knit family and the devastating impact of the allegations on Jordan and the family as a whole. Throughout the chapter, the defense seeks to paint Johnson as a well-mannered, misunderstood individual, while the prosecution challenges these portrayals, particularly through cross-examination, which casts doubt on the defense’s narrative.

The defense calls psychiatrist William Stratford, who argues that while Washburn exhibits symptoms of anxiety and depression, they do not meet the criteria for PTSD. In contrast, the prosecution’s witness, Dr. David Bell, testifies that Washburn’s symptoms do align with PTSD.

Each side then makes its closing argument. Prosecutor Suzy Boylan emphasizes the impact of the rape, arguing that Johnson left both physical and psychological marks on Washburn. She refutes the defense’s attempt to cast doubt on Washburn’s credibility, stressing that Johnson’s actions were criminal regardless of his character. Defense attorney Paoli aggressively challenges the prosecution’s narrative, portraying the accusations as baseless and relying heavily on purported common sense over expert testimony. Paoli dismisses Washburn’s account as inconsistent, while the prosecution highlights the evidence and the significant emotional and physical toll on Washburn. The chapter concludes with the jury being urged to consider the truth over confusion or sympathy when deciding on their verdict.

After only two and a half hours of deliberation, the jury returns a verdict of not guilty, surprising many who expected a longer decision-making process given the complexity of the case. The courtroom reacts with jubilation, especially among Johnson’s supporters. Washburn and her family are notably absent. The jury’s decision, influenced by reasonable doubt and the nuances of consent, leaves lingering questions about justice and the impact of societal attitudes on sexual assault cases. Juror Joanne Fargo reflects on the emotional toll of the trial and expresses discomfort with the defense’s aggressive tactics even as she acknowledges the legal reasoning behind the verdict.