Alyokhina, M. (n.d.). Riot Days. Metropolitan Books. Alyokhina’s account incorporates song lyrics, legal transcripts, and excerpts from her jail diary.Gessen, M. (2014). Words will break cement: The passion of Pussy Riot (First Riverhead trade paperback). Riverhead Books. Masha's reconstruction of events.Pussy Riot! A Punk Prayer for Freedom. (2013). The Feminist Press at CUNY. - A collection of letters, songs, poems, and courtroom statements.Three firsthand accounts detailing the story of Pussy Riot, formed in August 2011 consisting of a group of women ranging in age from 20 to 33, who, as a group, staged public guerilla performances generally filmed and placed on YouTube. Themes of their work included feminism, LGBTQ rights, and opposition to Russian President Vladimir Putin with their public actions specifically designed to illuminate and affect change in the prevailing culture and society about these issues. On February 21, 2012, Pussy Riot, dressed in bright colors and wearing balaclavas stepped into Moscow’s Cathedral of Christ the Savior unauthorized to perform Punk Prayer on the altar, a performance which lasted 40 seconds. During this performance they made the sign of the cross, genuflected to Mary, pumped their fists and kicked their legs while imploring the Mother Mary to banish Putin. The performance was staged two weeks prior to Russia’s national elections intending to draw attention to the ties between President Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church. Two group members, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova (Nadia) and Maria Alyokhina (Masha) were arrested on March 3, 2012, and then on March 16, Yekaterina Samutsevich (Katya) was also arrested. The three were charged with hooliganism motivated by religious hatred, denied bail, found guilty and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment. On appeal, Katya was freed on probation with the other two continuing to serve their terms. The facts of the case are public knowledge. The trial and sentence drew international attention and critique. The Cathedral of Christ the Savior is a Russian Orthodox Cathedral in Moscow. Patriarch Kirill was named as the leader in 2009, he endorsed Putin in 2012. Pussy Riot performed on the altar space, a space reserved for men, their balaclava, bright clothing, and bare arms further stood in contrast to the expected dress code for women in the church. As a conservative orthodox place of worship, there were strict codes of dress, behavior, and social norms related to the norms for women. The Cathedral, specifically the altar is sacred to the Russian people. Selecting the Cathedral as the place for their performance was a provocative move. They maintained that they were protesting the desacralization of the church resultant from a tight coupling between Vladimir Putin and church leaders such as Patriarch Kirill wherein the church was desecrated by this action and the performance sought to illuminate this concern.The charges levied against Pussy Riot included Hooliganism (Article 213 § 2 Clause B of the Russian Federation) defined as “a gross violation of the public order manifested in patent contempt of society and attended. . . by reason of political, ideological, racial, national or religious hatred.” Kanonovich (2015) examined the legal charges and observed the following: (a) the court failed to interpret the prayer as a criticism of Putin’s actions concluding that Pussy Riot lacked a political motive but instead intended insult to the church and believers; (b) this interpretation reframed Pussy Riot’s actions towards blasphemy; and (c) due to the international attention, it was suggested that the performance was a publicity stunt designed to capitalize on the Cathedral’s fame. In this way, Kanonovich (2015) asserted that Russian authorities used the law “not just to enforce religious orthodoxy, but to delegitimize public political protests by pushing them beyond the boundaries of both socially and legally acceptable forms of citizens’ civic participation.” Pussy Riot’s political speech and deliberate critique of Putin was denied and reframed. Institutional power served to marginalize and reframe Pussy Riot’s stated purpose and intention from critique of the church/state relationship and Putin to a rebellion against the church. In so doing, the incident was ultimately reframed as an issue of morality by portraying Pussy Riot members as disrespecting Russian Orthodox Church values and trying to incite religious hatred specifically against Orthodox Christianity.This is an intriguing case study from which to explore social protest, gender, legal interpretation, and the intersection of religion and politics. It also is a fascinating case to explore the role of the media in garnering international attention and the effects of this attention on outcomes.