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

[VivienneDelacroix]

Aibu to think that this show at the Edinburgh Festival should be cancelled? It mocks the circumstances around the murder of Meredith Kercher and serves it up as entertainment.

Not only is it horribly disrespectful of Meredith's family, but it also belittles the issue of violence against girls and women.

Meredith's siblings are calling for it to be pulled from the festival. There is also a petition calling for it to be stopped.

c.org/WXGTGJfpRh

So the verdict was not guilty

and they did not use the word innocent (in Italian!)

It's not sus. It's very insensitive what she is doing. I would have thought by now that someone in her life would tell her that it's enough. Part of the reason she was convicted in the first place was because of this attention seeking behaviour. She may be autistic, but this looks like narcissistic behaviour to me. She had a terrible time. Why perpetually go back to it if you know it upsets Meredith's family? Enough.

You've said a couple of times that the verdict was not guilty, which is different to just saying it wasn't innocent. Can you explain your rationale for saying it was not guilty? Obviously they didn't use those specific words given that the judgement was in Italian.

It was not in this country, it was over 20 years ago and although I don’t mind sharing the basics, I am not going to post details.

Italian courts simply don't use the word 'innocente' - it is always phrased in other ways.
They have different acquittal formulas, designed to specifically rule out any lingering suspicion.
For example (these results are ones I just googled) :
Common Acquittal Formulas

• Il fatto non sussiste ("The fact does not exist"): The court finds that the alleged crime never actually happened at all. 1,
• L'imputato non ha commesso il fatto ("The accused did not commit the fact"): The crime happened, but it was done by someone else, not the defendant. 1]
• Il fatto non costituisce reato ("The fact does not constitute a crime"): The defendant did the act, but it is not a crime under the law (such as acting in self-defense). 1,

Not just not guilty. Not guilty as she did not commit the crime. Stating very clearly, but obviously not clearly enough for some, that Amanda Knox is innocent.

Do you have difficulty in understanding at other times? How can I simplify this for you?

Tbf, as a Knox defender, furiously googling - I dont think there actually is a distinction between UK/US not guilty and Italian "innocence", other than that one sounds stronger than the other.

And nor do the Uk courts use the word innocent

guilty
not guilty

AK was found not guilty

And, @Multiplepillows , it was in the local press of the country, but , similar to here, not all road traffic deaths make bigger news outlets.

But they are seemingly all best understood, by UK standards, as "not guilty because...", not a higher standard.

I disagreed initially based on English language reporting, but I do think Multiplepillows is fundamentally correct that the decision should be understood as "not guilty" (although the scathing condemnation the court gave to the prosecution and lower courts should not be dismissed).

Yes, she was found not guilty, but not because there wasn't enough evidence to convict or due to errors in the previous court hearings. The court made a positive finding that Knox and Sollecito did not commit the crime. They did not use the word innocent, but you are trying to argue about a distinction without a difference. If they did not commit the crime, they are innocent.

Apologies if this has been mentioned but I’ve just read a Reddit thread account of this show, which is doing a few dates in the US before coming to the fringe. I thought it might be helpful if I paraphrased it.

to summarise, AK mostly ‘jokes’ about her time in incarceration, the dating opportunities she’s had or not had when she returned to the USA, awkward moments where she’s had to explain who she was and where she’d been etc, a few uncomfortable sexual encounters, some jibes about Italian stereotypes. The show seems to run on the assumption that the audience had read her book, listened to her podcast, seen the show she co-produced.

She does not mention Raffaele, or Patrick, she mentions Meredith once.

Interestingly, while it is acknowledged that the show really isn’t about Meredith, it IS very much about Amanda being a victim. Which she was in a lot of ways, but the person who wrote this account found it uncomfortable that she appears to have a lot of trouble acknowledging that there was an even bigger victim in this case, who suffered far more that Amanda, and there was a family that were never able to welcome home their daughter. Amanda never seeks to show any humility in the face of this, across all the various platforms she’s used to tell her story.

It was received fairly luke-warmly by the audience, a lot of polite laughter, a lot of people there to see AK in the flesh and curious about what she might say when not bound by edited prose or script.

The show ends with her cartwheeling across the stage.

Will be interesting to see how it is received when it does come to the Fringe, although it may be difficult to get a grasp on that since there will be no official reviews.

yes.

not guilty

Probably fair to add that the courts did find the Knox and Sollecito "cannot have materially participated" in the crime, so even thought the decision is best legally understood as only "not guilty", it is about as close a positive finding of innocence as is possible.

They didn't reach a legal decision that goes beyond the equivalent of a "guilty" or "not guilty" binary but, in summing up, appear to have concluded her guilt impossible.

That's a very simplistic way of looking at it

The court said that they did not commit the crime.

Not guilty can mean that there was not enough evidence to convict

In this case the court explained that they did not commit the crime.

They are innocent.

Why are you ignoring this fact? Are you trying to push an agenda that there wasn't enough evidence to convict? To cast doubt on their innocence? What is your motivation to ignore the court's ruling?

I think I've been open minded here - and yes, the equivalent within our legal system is merely "not guilty" but, in reaching their verdict, they did note Knox's involvement to be "quasi impossibile" (nearly/almost impossible) - which is about as strong a finding as can be made.

I understand what you're saying but until someone actually watches the show, we don't know if the show really is tactless or insensitive.
For all we know the show could actually be tactful and respectful about the murder, and the jokes/comedy aspect focus on how the media have portrayed her.
All the information we have is that it's a one-woman comedy show by Amanda Knox about her experience.
If this entire story taught us anything, it's to be wary of first impressions and be sure we have all the facts before judging.

I can not imagine the pain of losing my sister in such a way and then see someone make repeated attempts to make money from the tragedy.
How can anyone be so cruel and heartless?

A woman was wrongfully imprisoned and interbationallly vilified due to deranged levels of misogyny, and now some people don't think she should be allowed to laugh about the absurdity of it all.

How can anyone be so cruel and heartless?

For many people this is still what it comes down to. She’s a white woman so she can’t be innocent. None of the evidence or lack of evidence matters compared to her being a white woman. See also Lucy Letby.

Thanks for the account. I realise you are citing other people's reactions. Still I don't understand what humility it is people want from Amanda Knox.

What would humility in the face of someone else having murdered someone look like? What is there for Knox to be humble about here?

I don't think she can win in terms of mentioning Meredith Kercher. Leave her out and it's not acknowledging her. Keep mentioning her and it's constant reminders of her. One mention could be the best option.

People seem to feel that Knox should be grateful to be exonerated, and that she owes Meredith Kercher's family something because she was locked up for murdering their sister. I don't agree.

Mercedesblue11 has explained exactly why already. Because AK is white and the murderer is black.

I agree with you. It's appalling that someone was murdered, but if she didn't do it, so it's not clear what she needs to demonstrate 'humility' for, unless people think she's supposed to be grateful for being convicted, imprisoned, released, then retried, reconvicted of murder, only for the conviction to be finally overruled by the Italian supreme court. AK owns the facts of her own experience, and can use them as she wishes.

Rudy Guede would have served more time had the Italian police not messed up so badly and tried to cover up their failings by insisting on it being some group enterprise sex game/punishment ritual. Some of the stuff they came out with as motive was laughable.
The judge also had the choice between Not Proven and Not Guilty in the final appeal - they went with Not Guilty.
Knox begins her show this evening.
I hate censorship. Hated it when they did it to Jerry Sadiwitz, hated it when they did it to the JK Rowling play, hated it when they did it to Graham Linehan, will hate it if they do it to this. It goes against freedom of expression, which should be paramount.
For those interested in the content, an older Seattle review is here:

"Amanda Knox’s one-woman show uses humor to explore trauma recovery, parenthood" https://www.kuow.org/arts-life/2026-07-16/amanda-knoxs-one-woman-show-uses-humor-to-explore-trauma-recovery-parenthood