AIBU to think an Edinburgh festival show about Meredith Kercher's murder should be stopped?

Listen to yourself. Attacking the victim's family. I don't know why Knox's fans have to do this. The Kercher family only appears on media when Knox decides to use the tragedy to make money, which she seems to do on a regular basis. It's sick in my opinion.

all publicity generated creates an interest something that of course benefits Edinburgh festival, there can never too too much interest …

Knox knows the Kerchers would speak out what family wouldn’t in their situation she doesn’t give a fuck, she may not have to care about them but she does care about being in the public eye and knows how to generate public interest

So why not do her comedy routine in the many other festivals around the world where it won’t be so controversial well the answer is simple it wouldn’t create the attention and that it has and this as we all know is not only shared with herself and that’s the issue it’s also about a family who have suffered enough

still a nice platform for her break into the comedy side of public speaking

In fairness, maybe not all the people who think that know what had happened to Knox at the point when she wrongly implicated Patrick. For some reason posters criticising her for the false disclosure often leave that information out of their posts, coincidence no doubt, so I can see how perhaps not everyone is aware of it.

Yes, some people who are willing to casually overlook multiple violations of Article 3 (Prohibition of Torture, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment) and Article 6 (Right to a Fair Trial) might well think that.

But what does that say about them?

Well to be fair she was prosecuted and convicted for lying a year ago. Some people would hold the opinion it takes a certain person to tell bold lies like this.

Useful information, and kind of you to spell it out. Hopefully our Knox guilt truthers will take heed of it if they're ever in Italy, lest they too get a conviction.

Please, do tell, what extra revenue will the Fringe - the largest performing arts festival in the world - receive as a result of the controversy?

I'm also going to dare to venture that some people found Amanda Knox somewhat controversial already.

And, the fact remains, the media reaponse over the last 2 days was entirely driven by the Kerchers. I don't mean to condemn them (I don't think their statements were fair, but obviously they originate from severe trauma) but the notion that they unwittingly found themselves the centre of media attention - when they actively courted it for a campaign - is about as far wide of the mark as it gets.

And - again - the British press (and sections of the British public) have discussed Amanda Knox at length. Far more has been said about her than she has said on her own behalf. Even if the reason she chose the Edinbrugh Fringe is because it is in the UK (rather than it prominence and history as a performing arts festival), that would be entirely understandable and justified.

Not least given that the response from critics and audiences appears universal in that there was nothing disrespectful about the content, and the allegations made in the petition were completely wide of the mark.

She has her right to freedom taken away from her for years (wrongly) and now people want to take her right to free speech??? WTF.

She might be able to tour it or do other comedy festivals but unlikely to make big bucks unless it is also filmed and a streamer takes it on.
Which I would watch. Because I don't think you can really comment on anything if you have not seen it.
And none of us here have.

I really didn’t think you were that naive to think that Knox herself (many years in the public eye) and Edinburgh promoters would not know what controversy that leads to extra publicity this would cause

again they knew and it has done them both well as it is a big news story, selling a few tickets (she is in a small venue) is nothing compared to what this has and will generate for them both

From what I understand, the clips I have seen and the gallows humour on paper, it is more dramedy than a comedy show per se.
That lass of the middle, Eden Cher(?) the one who played Sue Heck did something similar when talking about giving birth to her twins.
More a monologue with the occasional wry part thrown in.
Edinburgh often has stuff like that.
She has done well though to get an 8.15 slot in the Gilded Balloon and to be sold out, albeit also 2 for 1, which some offer. The Edinburgh Fringe is not a money spinner, you are bloody lucky if you break even. And that goes for more household names like Rich Herring. He'd tell you there's not much profit to be made. It isn't lucrative but what it does usually do is give a chance for anyone to have a try.
So once you start cancelling people or taking away their platform, you are going against free expression. I didn't sign and wouldn't sign for that reason alone, even if the topic was offensive to me and the fringe has been known for controversy/taboo in the past. But once you start saying e.g. Jerry Springer the musical - bad! - and get your pitchforks, all you are doing is taking away others' freedoms.

And people like this are why jury trials are so scary and flawed.

Incidentally, if someone were to:

(a) try to prevent someone from exercising their freedom of speech then, having failed to do so, purported to celebrate freedom of speech;

(b) after accusing someone of murder despite a full-throated and final exoneration, pivoted their argument to "the show shouldn't be allowed because of her conviction for slander of another person - who has raised no objection to show - despite the fact that there are ongoing legal proceedings",

One might reasonably think they are posting comments in bad faith.

Happy to put it to the thread though - does anyone believe ThatJadeLion's genuine underlying concern is the conviction of slander?

I’m not stopping you though am I? I’m just commenting that you latched on the term “convicted criminal” and keep using it without context, perhaps to influence others and their opinion of Amanda Knox just by using this particular term. Maybe even to create a misleading impression she still has a murder conviction or is still somehow responsible for the murder (which had been fully disproven).

The show went ahead despite people trying to prevent it.

You don't get to preach the merits of freedom of speech when it prevailed despite you attempting to prevent it.

Has the show gone ahead... yes.

Did people exercise the right to sign a petition... Yes.

Isn't it great that both sides get to put across their opinions

You have to accept that others have different views without collectively labelling people as described in your own words 'internet trolls'... which can be interpreted as name calling.

And as this discussion is partly about freedom of speech, I’ll “drone on,” in your words as much as I like.. particularly while others continue repeating themselves too.

Calling the offence "weird” doesn’t erase the conviction, and predicting what may happen in future proceedings doesn’t alter its current legal status.

But signing petitions aiming to prevent someone from airing their view and others from being able to listen is, of course, totally fine.

Oh, and calling people "completely lacking in decency" of course, that's fine too.

And you dont think that's a bit rich coming from someone who has accused an exonerated woman, a victim of the most well known miscarriages of justices in history - who the court ultimately found could not possibly have had any material involvement in the murder- a murderer?

You'll have to excuse me for giving absolutely zero weight to your moral compass.

I find it baffling that people holding different opinions... even when based on proven facts are sometimes labelled internet trolls. People should be able to disagree without resorting to personal insults or name calling.

Isn't that the truth.

An appalling thing to say. This kind of nastiness does Knox no favours either, if her fans are completely lacking in decency.

So glad the show has been well received by audiences - a standing ovation 🤗

Just goes to show you - internet trolls are best ignored.

You keep droning on about her being a convicted criminal. Do you even understand what she was convicted of and how weird that offence of calunnia is in that it is very different from perjury? And that it has nothing to do with actual murder?

Id be amazed if it still stands after current ECHR proceedings