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

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).

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?

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

And some people overlook the fact that someone is a convicted criminal.

I don't wish to talk on detail about the case

Which is a shame.
Why?
Because it is interesting looking at it in hindsight.
It fascinated me because I am a linguist.
And in the same way the phrase Louise Woodward used "popped him on the bed" caused linguistic confusion, the phrase "see you later" in this case did. It is heartbreaking to think cultural expressions lost in translation can have the impacts they do.

I was also subjected to and influenced by all the media in Knox's case without having any Italian and relying on translation. Portofino an old poster on here, did sterling work back in the day.
I would love Amanda to do an AMA as I am sure there are things she did/chose to do that, in retrospect, she regrets (not insisting on a lawyer from the start would be one and what I advise all people everywhere, no matter what country, do not answer questions just as a helpful person. Hell, no).

I changed my mind on Knox's case once I started looking at it properly - even simple things like switching phones off: well yeah, I wouldn't have wanted to get called into work having been told not needed. I've done that myself! 😁 I still have questions but not gotchas or casting aspersion questions but rather the sliding doors/other path type (which in fairness wouldn't help her) like Do you wish you'd just headed off to Gubbio that day? (Clearly the answer would be Yes. Duh!)

But to hear some of you keep going on about the slander case: she paid for that. Four years of her life she won't ever get back.
Because the police were determined to break her and she crashed out. I speak a couple of languages very well but cannot begin to imagine how I'd have managed on my own at her age being interrogated in them. You'd end up telling people what they wanted to hear, to make it stop whilst questioning your own sanity.
Especially if you'd been high.

But the case should never have been brought. And Rudy Guede acted alone.

Let's pretend she specifically chose to perform in the UK because of how she was (and sometimes still is) treated by the media in the UK.

I'd certainly find that entirely understandable (brave, even).

And no, I do not think you can honestly claim that she "knew" (or even expected) that the Kerchers would launch their campaign, let alone make the particular claims about the show that they did. In any event, they are human beings with agency, to whom she is not accountable.

And - again - the overwhelming response to the show itself was that it was entirely respectful (exactly as Knox insisted).

Again, you unashamesly overlook her full-throated and final acquittal of the murder, which makes it hard to accept your apparent rigid deference to the legal system on the slander matter (where proceedings are not yet concluded) as being remotely genuine.

Incidentally - even if the slander verdict survives the ECtHR challenge - I do not believe that someone convicted of a crime should be barred from speaking (wherever will host them) from a terrible, extremely high profile injustice of which they were the victim.

Victims do not have to be perfect to be allowed to be heard, and scores of notable public figures (whether in politics, sport or entertainment) have continued to live public lives despite a criminal conviction.

Yabu - it’s not about Meredith Krecher but about Amanda Knox - you know the one who was exonerated

She was acquitted of murder, yes. Speculation about future proceedings doesn’t change her present legal status as a convicted criminal, for which she received a three year sentence.
The bold text really isn’t necessary. Have a good day.. genuinely. The sun is shining, and I’m perfectly capable of putting aside a difference of opinion without resorting to personal remarks.

Yes, worth pointing out that MOJ victims sometimes have other criminal convictions. Paddy Hill, for example, had previously done prison time for stabbing a nightclub bouncer before his wrongful murder conviction. After his exoneration, he became an active campaigner for MOJ victims, spoke publicly and did media.

She is using her own tragedy. It’s the Kerchers who continually make it about themselves. More so, Amanda Knox IS THE VICTIM of MISCARRIAGE of JUSTICE. And you are attacking not just the victim’s family but the victim herself.

The Kerchers could choose to be quiet and out of spotlight but they continue to vilify Amanda Knox for no reason like they did from the beginning. I remember all the original press coverage and both British media behaviour was appalling and the Kerchers didn’t show themselves in any good light.

She was forced by the police to accuse both herself and her boss of that murder.