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

Or the fact that she was not guilty of Meredith's murder, or that the court concluded that her direct material involvement in the attack was physically and logistically impossible.

Or the fact that she was subject to various violations of her human rights.

The law needs evidence. You can't pick and choose which parts you think are ok to accept. Knox and Sollecito were freed because the court confirmed the police evidence was flawed. They proved it. Similarly, you can't accuse the Police of violence just on the say so of the accused.

So you don’t think that AK has had doors closed to her. Right

I’ve just had a look and I think OP
you've posted a misleading opening thread

it certainly isn’t billed to be about mocking the circumstances around MK death - it’s billed as a chance to hear AK speak about her experience of being wrongly accused because of the way the world saw her and how that links to the patriarchy (my word) - which we know also links to the murder of women and girls - satire is often used to ta Joe difficult subjects

at the same time I bet people only booked to see it to see her in the flesh!

and also I can understand how it would feel for the family - anything around MK death

but I agree overall that AK should not be silenced - I can see why it’s called cartwheeled - again her behaviour as a women was disproportionately judged

I dont think she will actually be talking of the murder - it’s a show about patriarchy and the danger of it

YANBU

How exactly does it imply that?

*Watching someone for an evening is much less of a commitment than employing them, working alongside them or utilising their professional services.+

Implying you think AL has been applying to jobs and rejected

She told the truth about everything else, why would she lie about that?

And, of course, there was never going to be any evidence because her interview was not recorded (which was illegal the moment they considered her a suspect), she had no representative present (in violation of her human rights), and the authorities refused to investigate the accusation (another violation of her human rights).

Of course not, which is why I didn't say anything remotely resembling that. Not least because the idea that this is merely about job offers is so incomplete that it'd be beneath us. I feel safe in assuming we all know that would be only the first hurdle. A small part of the issues a PTSD sufferer believed by apparently the majority of the species to be a murderer would face.

I feel optimistic that some critical posters will tell us soon whether they'd be willing to work alongside her or not. That could be illuminating.

Ok you are entitled to your opinion.. but it obviously doesn't change the fact she is a convicted criminal with a three year sentence.

There is no evidence she was beaten or physically abused by the police. Check your facts.

Isn't "that is speculation" just a little bit rich coming from the poster who has continually speculated as to Amanda's guilt is relation to Meredith's murder, despite her acquittal?

And, while we can only speculate as to how the slander matter will ultimately conclude, given the ongoing proceedings, we can say with confidence that - at minimum - it stemmed from severe violations of Amanda's human rights.

Which honestly, I think makes your mocking "poor Amanda" pretty gross.

The accusation of physical violence was not proven. No evidence except Knox's accusation.

@neverbeenskiingSo what are they saying in the blackmail? Which companies? We care so post it here.

So you don’t know that she’s applied to lots
of role and been rejected.

got it

No idea, the poster who confidently asserted that she could've done anything is the one who you want to address that sort of question to. They must know a great deal of very specific things about her to make such a concrete claim. If the unthinkable happens and she can't back it up, I think a good way to look at this is has she had more jobs than she's sold tickets? My guess is no.

I wonder how many of the posters on this thread criticising Knox for making money doing this instead of some other conveniently unspecified thing would be fine with working alongside her?

That is speculation. Amanda Knox remains a convicted criminal with a three year sentence.

Has she applied for any positions and been rejected?

Well indeed. Watching someone for an evening is much less of a commitment than employing them, working alongside them or utilising their professional services.

And this isn't solely limited to the people who still believe she's guilty either. I don't think there's the remotest chance she killed Meredith. But I would nonetheless not want to work with her because of the level of attention, and potential for random loons to cause trouble. Not her fault of course, but equally not my problem.

Given the ECtHR’s previous finding that Amanda’s statements were extracted through severe human rights violations, I would be amazed if this slander conviction isn't ultimately overturned following the current ECtHR proceeding.

Ah yes that'll be it then. Of course it was Amanda Knox's fault that her housemate of weeks was murdered by a complete stranger. Probably because she was unlikeable or something.

Performing at Edinburgh Festival?

Which would further my point if so. The larger the number of people who believe someone to be a murderer who's got off, the more doors are going to be closed to them.

It must've been the woman's fault somehow.