Kennedy Smith Rape Trial Analysis

When dealing with rape trial cases, lawyers utilize linguistic methods and antiquated rape laws to control their cross-examination and frame their desired version of the case to their benefit. Rape trials are viewed more leniently and victim blaming is present when these circumstances revolve around an acquaintance rather than a stranger. An analysis was focused on the Kennedy Smith rape trial, where the role of the defense lawyer’s ‘controlling’ act was examined. It was noted that syntactic repetition was exaggerated in order to discredit the credibility of the victim’s claim. To illustrate, during the cross examination between the defense attorney, Roy Black and the complainant, Patricia Bowman, structural repetition and parallelism
For instance, a defense lawyer can use utmost resistance standard to invalidate a victim’s claim of rape or sexual assault. An example of a rape cross-examination displayed the lawyer centering on the word “know”, a factive predicate (270). The predicative assumed the alleged victim was not in a difficult situation due to her failing to seek help although knowing she had the option to. For instance, the lawyer stated during the examination, “ I am suggesting that you know that there was someone or a source or a facility within the university that might be able to assist you if you were involved in a difficult situation, isn’t that correct, because you went to the student security already about this other person?” (270). Through this controlling question, the statement implies the victim was never in “a difficult situation” so; she did not require assistance and was never raped. The utilization of the factive predicate word, know, presupposes there being a way out (270). If the victim had a way to divert from the predicament and was aware of it, then while being sexually assaulted, she apparently had the means to escape to safety. Hence, through the defense attorney’s controlling questions consisting of the predicate word know, the victim allegedly was never in a difficult situation; so the sexual contact was allegedly consensual. Otherwise, the victim would have sought assistance to escape the assault. In rape cases dealing with an acquaintance, will the counsel be less lenient if the sexual assault was included with physical violence, resulting in traumatic injury? Apparently in these rape cases, the victim is not defenseless because she or he has the option of escaping, and is not fully restricted. However, how will the victim be perceived if he or she was physically assaulted followed by being