Amanda Knox is really mad that the ‘Stillwater’ promotion keeps misusing her name

AMANDA KNOX DURING ITS INTERVENTION AT THE FESTIVAL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Stillwater is out today. That’s the movie starring Matt Damon and Abigail Breslin, and all of the promotional materials and reviews mention Amanda Knox. Stillwater is not “the Amanda Knox story.” It is, by writer-director Tom McCarthy’s description, “loosely based” on the Amanda Knox story. Knox was the American student studying abroad in Italy who was accused of murdering her roommate Meredith Kercher. Knox went on trial, she was convicted, then the conviction was overturned and Knox was acquitted. Rudy Guede murdered Kercher. So, the premise of Stillwater is similar: an American student is in a European prison for a crime she didn’t commit. And Matt Damon plays the Git Er Done American father who is trying to bash his way into saving his daughter. It feels… weird. And it feels really weird to Amanda Knox as well. She did a lengthy Twitter thread about Stillwater. I’m not embedding this, and this is just some of what she said:

Does my name belong to me? My face? What about my life? My story? Why does my name refer to events I had no hand in? I return to these questions because others continue to profit off my name, face, & story without my consent. Most recently, the film #STILLWATER. This new film by director Tom McCarthy, starring Matt Damon, is “loosely based” or “directly inspired by” the “Amanda Knox saga,” as Vanity Fair put it in a for-profit article promoting a for-profit film, neither of which I am affiliated with.

I want to pause right here on that phrase: “the Amanda Knox saga.” What does that refer to? Does it refer to anything I did? No. It refers to the events that resulted from the murder of Meredith Kercher by a burglar named Rudy Guede. It refers to the shoddy police work, prosecutorial tunnel vision, and refusal to admit their mistakes that led the Italian authorities to wrongfully convict me, twice. In those four years of wrongful imprisonment and 8 years of trial, I had near-zero agency.

Everyone else in that “saga” had more influence over events than I did. The erroneous focus on me by the authorities led to an erroneous focus on me by the press, which shaped how I was viewed. In prison, I had no control over my public image, no voice in my story. This focus on me led many to complain that Meredith had been forgotten. But of course, who did they blame for that? Not the Italian authorities. Not the press. Me! Somehow it was my fault that the police and media focused on me at Meredith’s expense.

The result of this is that 15 years later, my name is the name associated with this tragic series of events, of which I had zero impact on. Meredith’s name is often left out, as is Rudy Guede’s.

In the wake of #metoo, more people are coming to understand how power dynamics shape a story. Who had the power in the relationship between Bill Clinton and @MonicaLewinsky? The president or the intern? It matters what you call a thing. Calling that event the “Lewinsky Scandal” fails to acknowledge the vast power differential, & I’m glad that more people are now referring to it as “the Clinton Affair” which names it after the person with the most agency in that series of events.

I would love nothing more than for people to refer to the events in Perugia as “The murder of Meredith Kercher by Rudy Guede,” which would place me as the peripheral figure I should have been, the innocent roommate. But I know that my wrongful conviction, and subsequent trials, became the story that people obsessed over. I know they’re going to call it the “Amanda Knox saga” into the future. That being the case, I have a few small requests:

Don’t blame me for the fact that others put the focus on me instead of Meredith. And when you refer to these events, understand that how you talk about it affects the people involved: Meredith’s family, my family, @Raffasolaries, and me.

Don’t do what @deadinepete did when reviewing #STILLWATER for @deadline, referring to me as a convicted murderer while conveniently leaving out my acquittal. I asked him to correct it. No response.

And if you must refer to the “Amanda Knox saga,” maybe don’t call it, as the @nytimes did in profiling Matt Damon, “the sordid Amanda Knox saga.” Sordid: morally vile. Not a great adjective to have placed next to your name. Repeat something often enough, and people believe it.

[From Amanda Knox’s Twitter]

Amanda went on to talk about how often Tom McCarthy has mentioned her name as he promotes the film, and she points out that at no point did he actually contact her or talk to her. On one side, I understand McCarthy’s perspective that he didn’t use her name in the film and it’s not based on the specifics of the Meredith Kercher’s murder. Legally, McCarthy is protected. But when all of the promotional materials and all of the reviews mention Amanda Knox, it is legitimately problematic and Knox has every right to be pissed off and to make the arguments she’s making. Ugh.

"Stillwater" Red Carpet - The 74th Annual Cannes Film Festival

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

202 Responses to “Amanda Knox is really mad that the ‘Stillwater’ promotion keeps misusing her name”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Juliette says:

    Sorry Amanda but I’m not sorry for you. The only victim is and is always be Meredith.

    • Steph says:

      Unless you believe she murdered Meredith Kercher, I can’t understand how you can say this. She was imprisoned for at least 4 years and her name will forever be tied to murder. She is absolutely a victim as well.

    • Mary Mae says:

      Sorry Juliette, there is more than one victim in this whole mess. Meredith lost the most but Amanda comes in a very close second.

    • Gillysirl says:

      @Juliette – why do you feel that way? Meredith was the ultimate victim, doesn’t mean there was only one.

    • Oh_Hey says:

      Eww. Just eww.
      And you know why.

      Also what is going on in the comments here. Like she’s factually innocent and was the whole time and the interrogation tapes from the Italian police are just ridiculously bad.

      • L84Tea says:

        I despise the term “witch-hunt”, but that’s totally what the Italian courts did to her.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        L84tea
        The lead prosecutor literally argued and believed Knox was a witch practicing demonic crafts to raise satan. It was crazy.

    • Ninks says:

      Wow, that’s a pretty heartless take.

    • Ihatestupidpeople says:

      Absolutely disagree with you 100%. Amanda is a victim too. This statement is so close minded.

    • Lawcatb says:

      And this take seems to completely negate everything Amanda just said, including that Meredith was the victim and should be centered in the story.

    • lucy2 says:

      I disagree. There can be more than one victim here. Meredith was the victim of the crime, Amanda was the victim of the legal system, and the media.

      I appreciate her trying to put the focus back on Meredith here, and her family. I can’t imagine what they have been through over the years, and see the story used, again, for entertainment must be sickening.

    • Ariel says:

      If you/your daughter was wrongfully railroaded and imprisoned for YEARS/ I guarantee you would not have a glib, mean spirited – sorry, not sorry.
      Perhaps you want to rethink this decision before a house falls on you too.
      Yikes

    • Chana says:

      Agreed. I dont think she did it, but I’ve always thought she’s known more about that night than disclosed, based on her behavior and accusing her boss. She was wrongfully imprisoned, but it’s gross that she parlayed the experience into a media career.

      Also hate the extent to which she and US media has gone to sanitize the original story retroactively. Her wiki page is totally scrubbed and can’t be edited. Reads like PR.
      Zero mention of “Foxy Knoxy”, totally downplaying the insane media circus around her, and no mention of her bizarre behavior that made her a suspect in the first place. I can see why she would want distance from that part of her life & that name, but the media circus is also her entire claim to fame and is technically accurate.

      One line on her page dismisses the allegations put forward by that Italian best seller as “imagined”, followed by NINE citations, six of which seem totally irrelevant? I heard that book was discredited, and I’m sure it was, but how and why?

      • lanne says:

        Her behavior? Really? This is why rape victims aren’t believed sometimes, because their behavior doesn’t conform to whatever Hollywood idea the viewer has in their mind. Please do better.

      • Robin says:

        Goodness me. This was a case of a young woman acting perhaps strangely but not criminally. The DNA evidence was a joke and she was dragged through an Italian court system that stacked the odds against her and manipulated a confession from her. What really was her offence – being pretty? acting oddly in the police station? being called foxy? There is a man in jail for this crime. Why is this so hard to grasp. NB Knox’s implication of her boss was disgusting. There was a recent documentary suggesting that if Knox had got on a plane and out of the country, which was her right at that point, she would have had proper legal counsel and potentially not have spiralled into bringing others into the fray as a way of digging herself out of a hole.

      • GamerGrrl says:

        Foxy Knoxy referred to her abilities on the soccer field. It was picked up as a slut-shaming component by the British press. It SHOULD be omitted. Her behavior as well. And her “claim to fame?” Really? She’s been pretty clear that this was not something she asked for.

      • teaholic says:

        “Foxy Knoxy” was coined by her elementary school classmates about her soccer abilities. She was eight.

        “Parlayed her experience”–‽ Her parents had to take out second mortgages on their homes, plus they emptied savings and retirement accounts to pay her legal bills. Her grandmother took out a loan for hundreds of thousands of dollars to help.

        She was mistreated while being interrogated and told Patrick had confessed. He first tried to sue the cops for brutality, but won only a paltry sum. Then he turned around and sued her, but changed his story. He slutshamed her and, well, lied. Why does that get shoved under the rug?

      • emu says:

        I believe her boyfriend at the time did it

    • Grant says:

      Shame on you!

    • local russian hill says:

      wow what compassion you have juliette. but seriously your perspective is close minded and heartless. i hope you decide not to comment on future articles until you’ve done some self reflection. thank you.

      • LilacMaven says:

        I suspect Juliette is British. There are a lot of people across the pond who have never accepted that Amanda Knox played no role in Meredith’s death.

        I’ll admit, I thought she was guilty at first, too, but the evidence at this point is clear. She didn’t do it. But there a lot of people who will simply never accept that.

  2. Soupie says:

    I agree with Amanda, but if she hadn’t acted all jinky in the first place, she wouldn’t be infamous. Granted she was a silly young college student (and some of the memories of her coffeehouse waitressing are concerning) but she should have just come clean. Probably would have gotten her some time, so that’s why she didn’t come clean. She saw and knew a lot more than she let on. I really liked The Behavior Panel’s impressions of her. (YouTube)

    In the future she’ll write a memoir, a tell-all confessional book after she does some true growing up. She’ll come clean and make bank so there’s that.

    • Steph says:

      can you elaborate on what was jinky and what she should have come clean about and this coffee house stuff. I never paid attention to why they were so focused on her to begin with.

      • Soupie says:

        !
        I spent years paying attention to her case. People who worked with her and customers had a weird vibe about her. Criminal investigators know a lot more behind the scenes than they let on publicly.

        Part of what was jinky was she was a college student using and slutting around and not coming clean about it, for starters. She also knew a lot more about the crime scene than she let on. There’s a whole lot more. If you’re interested, dig into it.

      • Sigmund says:

        “ Part of what was jinky was she was a college student using and slutting around and not coming clean about it, for starters. ”

        @Soupie Um, what? Using drugs and having sex does not make her a murderer (or a bad person, despite your implication). Stop slut shaming. It’s sexist and muddying the waters.

      • equality says:

        Fooling around and using aren’t highly unusual behaviors for college students. Murder is. And how can you prove she knew more about the crime scene if she never let on? “Weird vibes” about someone certainly don’t constitute proof of anything and many people say that about someone accused of murder after the fact whether they felt that way before or not. Sort of “I knew all along” syndrome.

      • Mac says:

        WTAF is this comment? Amanda can have sex with whomever she wants. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact she was wrongly convicted of a crime she didn’t commit.

      • Soupie says:

        @Sigmund and Mac
        Excuse me. A woman was murdered. Amanda omitted and lied, because she was doing stuff that was questionable and immature.

        I did jinky stuff like that at that age and I had lots of sex with whoever I wanted back in the day, but I wouldn’t have lied and omitted about BEING A WITNESS in the murder case of a roommate and what I saw and knew. No way am I slut-shaming.

        And yes she WAS a witness. Do you guys not understand that the investigators knew that she knew more than what she was letting on? Did you read in-depth about the case? :eyeroll:

      • Mac says:

        @Soupie saying someone was “slutting around” is 100% slut shaming. And you know it.

      • Purplehazeforever says:

        Amanda Knox did lie & accuse her boss, a black man, of the murder. She impeded an investigation & there’s too many excuses made for that, honestly. Did she know more? Maybe. But slut shaming her? Come on.

      • Chaine says:

        “Slutting around”?! Really? Please got back to the Duggar compound and stfu about any woman, ever.

      • superashes says:

        Meredith’s bra was the start and end of any physical evidence of Amanda or Raphael being there at the time of the murder (which is no evidence at all because they were roommates), a bra which, by the way, was overlooked and sat on the floor lost for 47 days, and was directly handled by investigators using the same gloves they used to open the door using a doorknob that did have Meredith and Raphael’s DNA on it, as they tried to force the door open when Meredith was not answering her phone and they found blood.

        As concerns the “investigation”, the police interviewed her repeatedly as a witness purposely to avoid having to give her a right to seek counsel. When interviewing said “witness” (who was clearly being interviewed as a suspect, in a language she did not fully comprehend), they withheld food, water and the lavatory. They beat her. They did this repeatedly over the course of several days until she would implicate someone in the murder. When she eventually implicated her boss, that wasn’t good enough, and so then she was made to state that she was present and observed the murder. Only then was she afforded the right to ask for an attorney, which the inspectors then promptly refused and, for good measure, claimed she would go to jail for 30 years if she pressed the issue.

        The “investigation” was complete and utter horseshit by anyone’s standards. Even the Supreme Court in Italy described the case as being a sensational failure.

        Did Amanda do ostensibly weird things during the 24/7 scrutiny of hostile media coverage? Yes. She had a mental break at one point during all of this and did a cartwheel. In the face of a brutal assault on her character in magazines, newspapers, and even books, all of which were rife with false claims about her relationship with Meredith, her childhood, you name it. That is enough to break anyone.

        Is Amanda the cause of her own infamy? I suppose yes, if by that you mean she is the one that kicked all this off by, after being concerned for Kercher’s well being when she didn’t answer her phone, trying to get the other roommates involved and eventually calling the police.

        Oh yes, she was very jinky. I do hope she grows up soon.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        Sex and drugs are *not* murder.

        Weird “vibes” are not evidence of a damned thing. And please: prosecutors ” knew more” than they let on? If they had any valid evidence, any actual facts, they would have used it.

        She had nothing to “come clean” about. DNA evidence completely exonerated her.

        She was viciously persecuted because people didn’t approve of her sexuality, and needed a convenient scapegoat. This is not justice. It’s barbarism.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        And has long been a pattern in criminal prosecutions– you see it over and over again. Women get convicted on very flimsy or nonexistent evidence because they are too sexual, “flashy” in their dress choices, wear a lot of makeup, and otherwise cross the lines of rigid sexual conformity. If they are not pure and virginal, juries are quick to find them guilty– even against the evidence. The case against Darlie Routier is especially egregious.

      • Kviby says:

        Yikes I’m a little younger than her and went to Europe around the same Time, including Italy. At that time you didn’t admit to police if you use drugs, it was still very illegal. And you in general don’t tell people “I hooked up” maybe now 20 year olds do but even young men would not be shouting that out at that time. I would never encourage women to be promiscuous as I don’t feel it’s in their benefit but if they do it’s nothing to do with them also being sketchy or a bad person. It can come from weakness or loneliness or just an impression that it’s a normal behaviour

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Soupie
        That’s nice you thought her behavior was “jinky”, but let me ask you if you feel that way about all people on the spectrum put in a high stress situation? Or just her because you clearly paid close attention to the unbiased insider reporting not sensationalized for the media.
        Have a seat.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Let’s not forget she accused her boss, a black man, of being involved – ruined his life and business. She is not the innocent princess that she likes to present herself as. She is innocent of the murder but she is not innocent of the bad choices she made afterwards – choices that she hasn’t ever really taken responsibility for.

      • TQ says:

        Yep. Her false accusation against Patrick Lumumba ruined his life. She has never apologized to him. SMDH.

      • Anna says:

        This. I guess no mention of *him* in all of her long missive. smdh

      • ennie says:

        Did she really accuses her boss? for real?

      • superashes says:

        In her defense, she accused him after a completely insane interrogation process where she was denied counsel, denied food or water or a bathroom, was beaten, was shouted at, and was told to “imagine” him committing the crime. She recanted the statement quickly and repeatedly and made clear multiple times that it was a product of stress, coercion, etc. The police rushed out to arrest him anyway, using racial epithets and physical violence along the way.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        She doesn’t have to be an “innocent princesss” for this to be be a horrible miscarriage of justice. Why do women have to be “innocent princesses” btw? You might want to do some soul searching.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Digital and TQ
        The accusation came under duress during the now discredited interrogation that was never even properly logged or documented and while there was an apology of sorts it was never carried broadly.

      • Bryn says:

        yes the false accusation was terrible but look at the situation. The police were interrogating her for hours, we all know how that goes. People say crazy things when the cops yell at you for twelve hours straight and insist you know more. She was a young lady in a different country who didnt know many people. Its sad but I totally get where the false accusation would come from.

      • teaholic says:

        Let’s not forget that the cops—in the midst of that inquisition told her that Lumumba confessed. They did treat him badly, but after he sued the cops for brutality and got very little, he turned around and completely changed his story so he could sue her. His original story was that the cops basically treated him the same way they treated Amanda, so it supported her story.

        To plausibly sue her she needed to be the bad guy, not the cops. So suddenly the cops were perfect gentlemen, while he slutshamed Amanda viciously. Is that okay? He claimed she was so slutty around customers he had to fire her, that he just knew things were bad between her and Kerchner, and nobody questioned those false accusations. In reality, she was in her first relationship, she was still employed because they were texting about her schedule the night of the murder, and he barely interacted with her, much less Kerchner, who he never even met. “Witchhunt” in the US always refers to guilty men, but it historically means men falsely accusing women.

    • L84Tea says:

      She 100% did not kill her roomate. She may have been young and immature and acted “jinky”, but DNA evidence does not lie. You should watch the documentary on Netflix about this. It’s crystal clear that Rudy Guede assaulted and murdered Meredith alone and that Amanda was wrongfully smeared and imprisoned. I’m not saying her personality is perfect, but she still didn’t kill Meredith.

      Your slut shaming is appalling.

      • Soupie says:

        I didn’t say she was guilty. I said she brought on her trouble all by herself. She was already problematic before the incident, and she made it worse by omitting and lying.

        And yes, accusing her boss of the murder was beyond the pale. (thanks for the reminder Digital Unicorn)

      • Mac says:

        Please define “problematic.” Was she living her life in ways you don’t approve of? That isn’t problematic, it’s simply none of your business.

      • Robin says:

        L84Tea. Agreed. I watched the same documentary, and I suggest it may be an idea that anyone who posts on this topic would benefit from having a look at it. The case against Knox was based on a vilification of her as a young, sexually active woman. The DNA was a farce. The Madonna/whore complex rode roughshod over any hopes of her having a fair trial. It’s a shame that the mythology of her as some sex fiend killer remains so at large. Behaving oddly in a foreign country when you are accused of killing someone is not a crime.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        L84tea
        She has been found to be on the spectrum. Take anyone and put them in a high stress situation and see how they are. Then take someone with that social and behavioral differences and see how “jinky “ they act.

      • teaholic says:

        The prosecutor in this case once threatened Richard Preston—the mystery writer, and brother of Robert Preston, the author of “The Hot Zone”—-with arrest AS the “Monster of Florence” because he didn’t like the questions Preston was asking.

        Preston was a teenaged schoolgirl in the US at the time of the first “Monster” murder, without a passport. This was thecprosecutor who leaked to the British tabs pictures of Knox and Kerchner’s bathroom, smeared with pink chemicals, and put out to the world that the pink substance was blood.

    • Susan says:

      Acting jinky is not a crime.

      • Chana says:

        It’s definitely not, but it’s why the Italian police and media had it out for her. It’s not fair, but it’s accurate.

        The Italian police thought she was doing “cartwheels” in the interrogation room. It turns out she was doing yoga. I still think that doing yoga in the immediate aftermath of a brutal murder is super weird. I think it’s even weirder that detail is not on her wikipedia page?

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        The “detail” is utterly irrelevant to the case.

      • Susan says:

        If i were accused of a crime and in a prison cell, i probably would be hyperventilating and having a panic attack. A way I try to calm down in high pressure situations is…meditation and yoga. It’s not unheard of.

      • teaholic says:

        If it were, we’d need lots more jails.

    • WithTheAmerican says:

      “Slutting around”? I’m quoting your below comment because I can’t reply to it.

      GTFOOH.

      • WithTheAmerican says:

        And for the record, I’ve never been comfortable with Amanda blaming a black man, her princess vibe, or her inappropriate affect. I suspect she has mental health challenges that make her uncomfortable to be around.

        There is no correlation between MI and murder, though. A person needs to have a violent inclination to murder.

      • lucy2 says:

        Agree with both posts.

    • Jordana says:

      “Jinky” ? And she had a “weird,vibe”….
      Ok, so I would be happy if you never sat as a juror. Ever. That’s how you judge people’s guilt or innocence? That’s just wrong.

    • Gloria says:

      Oh my goodness, I truly hope you’re never on a jury.

    • Arpeggi says:

      When you’ll be falsely accused of murder, let us know how easy it was for you to act 100% innocently all the time AND in hindsight and not be desperate to the point of doing illogical things to save your skin

      A young adult having sex and using is not unusual (older adults do it too), no shame there

    • Krystina says:

      @Soupie..
      “slutting around”???
      Wow.

    • Kviby says:

      There’s not just one way to act. People need to be mindful of neurodiversity

    • Veronica S. says:

      I’m not looking to start a fight here, but as a neurologically atypical person…hearing people cast suspicion based on “weird” behavior makes me so unsettled. Like, some of us ARE unintentionally weird. Sometimes reactions to traumatic events aren’t rational and can be off putting to people from afar. One of the reasons police abuse in interrogations is starting to really get looked at is because of how often it leads to false confessions, and we can definitely see how that impacted this case with what happened to her boss.

      At the end of the day, this woman lost FOUR YEARS OF HER LIFE, had her name dragged through the mud internationally, and probably saw the loss of a lot of mental stability all for the price of not acting in a way that people felt was “normal enough.” Rudy Guede is serving a sixteen year sentence. That means Cox served a QUARTER of the same sentence as the man who actually committed the crime. That’s a hell of a price for a person to pay for mistakes, especially since she’ll have to carry that guilt and trauma with her for the rest of her life…all because of how the police handled this case.

    • Lauren says:

      It may come as a surprise to you, but casual drug usage and sleeping around while in college is normal in Italy. The drugs part might not be exactly legal, but I remember that during my college years in Venice my classmates used drugs, there was a lot of heavy drinking and a lot of sleeping around. same when I move to Rome for my master’s. That is very much part of the culture, and I will not fault Amanda for partaking in that. Her behavior towards her ex-boss was absolutely disgusting and it reaks of white privilege as she was able to eventually leave Italy and get a semblance of normal back, he is still treated like a criminal here in Italy. There is a lot to judge Amanda for, but slut-shaming absolutely not.

    • Lara says:

      @soupie, i hope you know you’re a terrible person.

      • A.Key says:

        Wow that’s harsh, and I don’t even agree with Soupie.
        One wrong comment and immediately you become Hitler I guess, Jesus…

      • Trillion says:

        OMG, A.Key you just did the SAME THING by comparing the poster to …..HITLER? wow.

      • teaholic says:

        Replying to A. Key—-Hitler? Somebody criticizes some terrible comment and that’s the equivalent of…..genocide?

    • Isabella says:

      Shows how much you know about the case. Amanda didn’t even work in a coffeehouse. She had a part-time job in a bar because she wasn’t a rich college girl and had to earn money to stay in school. She never did anything odd in the bar. In her off hours, she got high grades, smoked a little weed and had sex. Guess what? That is normal anywhere in the world.

      You come across as a nasty person.

    • Drea says:

      Screw right off with that BS. How misogynistic of you – “slutting around”…. What someone does in their bedroom, even a college girl, is NONE of your business.

      • teaholic says:

        That “slutting” around school of thought comes directly from Lumumba, who the cops told Amanda during that torturous interrogation had confessed. She apologized but it’s only a confession under duress when it’s a man. Lumumba sued the police for abuse, so his case actually supported Knox’s, but he didn’t get a lot of money, so he sued Knox instead and changed his story and slutshamed her. We as a culture really like men who lie about women, but we really hate women who tell the truth and fight the lies.

        Only bad cops don’t tape interrogations, usually.

      • Otaku fairy says:

        “We as a culture really like men who lie about women, but we really hate women who tell the truth and fight the lies.” Yep, that really is true in so many situations.

  3. Oh_Hey says:

    Gross for all involved but Knox. Damon really used to come off as the “good” one between him and Affleck and has spent the last 10 years loudly disabusing the world of that. Ugh.

    • Soupie says:

      Isn’t it interesting that Damon has shown his true colors and people are catching on that he’s actually a real a hole. Another actor I like but can’t stand him as a person. Like, that foundation he and Affleck set up for new film makers and how bad that was, and turned out. And much more.

      • Gillysirl says:

        co-sign on this. he uses Ben as the “bad one” to look like the “good one”.

    • JULIE says:

      Don’t like Damon. Never have. Comes off as a closet asshole. Leans on the fact that he’s not out doing pap walks like Ben as the reason for his success. You know Affleck’s a mess. I’m done with that. It’s the ones like Damon who I don’t trust.

      • teaholic says:

        This and Gillygirl’s comment make me think that that type of thing is more common than people realize. Guys will defend any other guy for anything but they will believe and defend any awful thing another guy says about women, won’t they?

  4. Darla says:

    I have to do this, it’s a pet peeve. Lewinsky decided she was going to sleep with the President, and told everyone that, before she went to DC, and before she knew Bill. So while the President has immeasurably more power than an intern, he had no power over her when she made the decision to sleep with him. She used her full agency to make that decision before even meeting him during a time he had zero power or influence over her.

    As for this, I’m going to see Stillwater, sorry. I think I won’t return to this story because I don’t care what anyone else’s opinion on Lewinsky/Clinton is. I really don’t.

    • Jacindaaaa says:

      Is that just hearsay though?

      Also Clinton had tons of affairs so he’s not that innocent!

      • Oh_Hey says:

        Right – like this post is a lighting rod for women that do not like other women today. It’s like they turned on the bat signal in here.

    • WithTheAmerican says:

      People love to bring up Clinton as they usually defend Trump the credibly multiply accused rapist.

      I’m with you, Darla. There was a power disparity that was NOT okay, but he didn’t zero in on someone who didn’t want relations with him and then use pressure and power to get her to harm her own intentions.

      Also, I’m team Monica 100% – she has been abused by the press and by Republicans who refuse to drop this and used and abused her as a weapon to beat a political opponent rather than care about the actual issue.

      Also to the general woman hate in the comments here, WE SEE YOU red pilled impotents.

    • Willow says:

      So for that her life should be ruined? She wasn’t married. She wasn’t in a position of incredible power and influence. And yet the punishment she received was far greater.

      • Pinellas Pixie says:

        The punishment for women is always far greater than the punishment for men. This is not new and didn’t start with Monica.

    • KTate says:

      @Darla Whew! I’m glad you don’t care what anyone else’s opinion is on The Clinton Affair. Because I don’t care about your’s. And also: your opinion is trash. Have a blessed day!

      • Pinellas Pixie says:

        Serious question for you. Is “have a blessed day” the new “bless your heart?”

    • Bettyrose says:

      I guess Darla won’t ever see this but I had such a crush on Clinton. I was never a DC intern but if Clinton had tried to seduce me I would have let him. And had I been in his presence I probably would’ve been flirtatious to indicate that. As a feminist I justified that to myself because I honestly believed they were in a business partnership and open marriage. And I truly believed Clinton’s affairs were consensual. As for what we’ve learned since, I still believe their marriage was open but Hillary never signed off on him being an indiscreet jackasss. And the rape allegations… well, yes I now believe Clinton is a rapist. And my inner 19 year old no longer wants to sleep with him. But I am still 100% team Lewinsky.

      • pamspam says:

        Bettyrose I agree with everything you said here.

      • teaholic says:

        All of Clinton’s accusers sat with Trump at the debates, even though it wasn’t Bill he was debating. They seem way more focused on Hillary than Bill. Hillary had to defend a rapist early on in her career or risk her license—-and that guy got nine times as much time as Brock Turner—-but that victim appeared on all the right wing “news” channels and did not make a good impression. When Hannity has to remind you that there’s a trial transcript that you need to meet, it’s not good.

    • Darla says:

      No it’s not hearsay, she said it and more than once. This is part of the infantilization of white women. I wrote about this, it’s too long to get into here, if they don’t want me to post this I will totally understand if they delete https://dildockdystopia.com/blogs/news/monica-lewinsky-tweets-a-joke-internet-goes-nuts-lets-evaluate

      • Coco says:

        Did Lewinsky herself ever admit to having said that? Was she recorded saying that, or did she write it down? Because if other people are just claiming they HEARD her SAY those things, then yes, it is hearsay. Perhaps it’s multiple instances of hearsay from multiple witnesses that support each other, but hearsay none the less.

      • bettyrose says:

        Regardless of whether she said it, what’s the big deal about a college girl saying “I’m going to sleep with X guy”? It actually wasn’t even all that likely that she would end up having sexual relations with the President of the United States. I imagine plenty of young people had that same thought and never had the opportunity. Dude was the first young, appealing president my generation had ever known, so no harm in being like “given the chance, I would.” The reason that blow job was a big deal was because a right-wing plant in the White House was looking for dirt on Clinton, pretended to be Lewinsky’s friend, and went to the media. Sure Monica should maybe have been more discreet, but actually it’s the powerful adult in this situation, i.e. the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, who should have had some maturity and discretion. No one is infantilizing Lewinsky by saying she had sexual agency but made bad choices in talking to Linda Tripp; the media firestorm wasn’t her fault.

      • stagaroni says:

        The now ex-wife of Lewinsky’s high school drama teacher is the one who is credited with the kneepad quote. The drama teacher had an affair with Lewinsky when she was a teenager, and it continued for 5 years, overlapping the Clinton affair.

    • detritus says:

      If a child decides to sleep with the president and he complies, he’s still the one at fault. No matter how much that child dreamed

  5. Jacindaaaa says:

    Maybe she can talk when she apologizes for using a black man’s name (Patrick) and blaming him.

    Otherwise nothing to see here Amanda.

  6. tw says:

    Knox isn’t a murderer and what happed to her is wrong. She is however a psychopath who acted like she DGAF that her roommate was murdered.

    • Purplehazeforever says:

      Bingo…

    • Arpeggi says:

      We don’t have to be friends with her, yay! But her arguments here remain valid

    • Isabella says:

      Wow, The Amanda trolls are live and well. Psychopath. You come across as unhinged yourself.

      • bettyrose says:

        That sex-fiend/psychopath narrative was definitely promoted early on, and I admit I may have believed it at one point, but then I learned lots of things: Like, she wasn’t shopping for lingerie, she was buying clean underwear while all her possessions were in police control. She wasn’t turning cartwheels in the police station. She was stretching after hours of sitting. Moreover, while all the other foreign students high-tailed it out of Italy, Amanda stayed because she thought she could be useful. It was naive and foolish, perhaps, but well-intentioned. And finally the theories about her being on the spectrum explain a lot about her presenting behavior that others didn’t understand. And the criticism of her spending the night with a guy she’d only been dating for a week? In the 2000s? Seriously? I met a guy in 2001 who I slept with on the first night. We’re still together 20 years later. Not that it matters. We were/are blessed to live in a time when one could have casual sex with minimal risk.

      • teaholic says:

        I wonder what kind of overlap there is between the people who sob over Johnny Depp and vilify Amber Heard, and the Knox Qanon-style people, and the people who think Meghan “stole” Harry?

  7. Erika says:

    Y I K E S on these comments (slut and victim shaming, really??)

    She is making very valid points that are often made in other cases but are somehow not allowable when we view a young woman as somehow culpable. No one gets to cherry pick which cases of power abuse matter and which ones don’t. Did she act weird? Yes. Was she inappropriate? Sure. Was she railroaded by terrible investigations, public opinion, and a disaster of a legal system? Absolutely.

    Just because someone makes a mistake, lapse of judgement, or maybe is 20 and doesn’t know how to handle being accused of murder (when she was not the 100% innocent we all wish our parents thought we are) doesn’t mean they deserve injustice. This time it happened to a pretty white girl, imagine how many times it happens to BIPOC people?

  8. Isserley says:

    Internalized misogyny is well and alive folks. Disgusted by some of the comments here, especially @Soupie’s comments on her “slutting around” and wrongful imprisonment/incarceration as something someone “brings on herself” as opposed to an injustice committed by the state.

    The notion that someone has to be perfect, whatever on earth that means to you, to be a victim is so harmful. Any of us could be construed as imperfect enough to warrant the prevention of our access to justice after being wronged/harmed. You know who benefits from that gatekeeping? The people/institutions that do a great deal of the harm. Not a coincidence how often this delegitimization happens to women and BIPOC either.

    • equality says:

      Well put.

    • lanne says:

      Amen. I challenge any of you who are slut shaming her to put yourself in her shoes, to be interrogated for days in a foreign country, to be young and dumb and terrified and do everything exactly “correctly.” Let’s do better, people.

    • LBB says:

      Truth! I knew the comments would be a mess.

    • Arpeggi says:

      Exactly! What the heck is wrong with the “Well, if I were wrongfully accused of murder, I’d be acting so differently” trope?! There’s no way to know how you’d react and there’s no time machine available to change how you were behaving before the murder to make you look more innocent and likeable to the public.

      My dad was involved in a manslaughter case when he was around 17-18, there was absolutely no way he would be convicted of anything, he was just an unfortunate witness. My grandparents still hired Robert Badinter (the future French Minister of Justice that abolished death penalty) to help him navigate through all this because it was still an absolutely terrifying and panicking situation; hers was a trillion time worst, of course you’ll be prone to have breakdowns, act weird and focus on your own terrible circumstances instead of mourning the victim!

      Plus the whole point of going abroad for a year prior to SM was to have fun, maybe screw around a bit while being in a place where no one knows you and where you don’t have to care about your reputation because you’ll be leaving anyway (and yes, sometime go to classes), there’s no reason for getting chastised for having done exactly that

    • Imogene says:

      I know I’d be a TOTAL weirdo if I were accused of murder, so the “she was so off putting” accusation doesn’t hold a ton of water with me.

    • molly says:

      Well said, thank you!

    • LahdidahBaby says:

      Isserley–thanks for the humanity that your decency and common sense brought to this discussion. Much appreciated.

  9. Ines says:

    Deleting. Posted in the wrong place..

  10. Ann says:

    Knox is absolutely right in condemning this misuse of her name. The fact that the filmmakers never contacted her about it is unconscionable. They are making money off of her ordeal, and off of what happened to poor Meredith Kirchner, too.

    Look, Amanda Knox was a 20-year-old girl. She was pretty, athletic, popular. She was probably a little full of herself, and a little self-absorbed, and after the murder she acted in ways that made some people suspicious. Fair enough. I am leaving the part about her having sex and doing drugs out of it, because it’s not relevant. Especially the sex part, WTF? Having sex doesn’t make people violent.

    And yes, her accusing her black boss was appalling and wrong. But at the end of the day, who botched this case? The police. People who feel cornered, even people who didn’t do anything wrong but still feel accused and scared, will point fingers. It was up to the police to determine whether her accusation had any merit. You only need to watch a season or two of Law And Order to know that.

    The police and the justice system were in charge here and they screwed up badly and people were hurt, badly. Knox WAS a victim. Their victim.

    I’m disgusted by this and I’m glad she spoke out.

  11. CJ says:

    Why even relate it to the Knox story? Aren’t they’re enough American kids behind foreign bars?

  12. Ariel says:

    If she had any legal grounds she should sue the pants of the director, the studio, the production company and Damon if he mentions her name even once.

    She has every right to be angry.

  13. Bettyrose says:

    I can’t believe I read the word slut on this site. 😬 Amanda Knox’s discussion of agency is powerful. I hadn’t ever thought of it that way but none of this is her story. She had zero control over any of it. I don’t know the details of her accusing her boss though. I thought the police accused him and in days of interrogation in Italian with no sleep Amanda agreed. Even if that’s how it happened, a man’s life was ruined and she should say his name and count him among the horrible events associated with her beyond her control.

    Stillwater looks like a horrible movie that plays up American xenophobia. Don’t send you angelic white daughter overseas. UGH! It probably isn’t that because I can’t believe Matt Damon would sign onto something that awful but I suspect that still the message plenty of viewers will get anyway.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Some of the allegations she made about police treatment were not proven in the European Court of Human Rights (she filed a suit against the Italian police to the court) – while she was questioned for 53 hours over 5 days with no lawyer present and with a compromised/incompetent police translator the court ruled that there was no evidence to prove that the police treated her in a violent (such as slapping her), inhuman or degrading way. I can’t remember the exact ruling but the court accepted the complaints that she was denied a lawyer and independent translator but threw out her other complaints (such as the slapping around the head).

      As for the Patrick Lumumba false accusations – the Italian appeal court upheld that charge against her during the last trial and took the 4 years in prison as time served for that. IIRC there was no evidence to prove that the police co-erced/beat her into making that accusation as she has claimed, but it’s been a long time since I’ve looked at the details of the case. He’s tried to sue her but so far has gotten nowhere, not even a public apology.

      • Bettyrose says:

        Thanks for the explanation. I think my compassion for Knox now is in some ways overcompensating for all the years I suspected her involvement. And her statement above shamed me because I consider myself media savvy but I’m guilty of being swayed by the media angle that this is her story. I actually didn’t remember the claims of police violence but days of interrogation in a foreign language without sleep would break a lot of people, irrespective of violence. Still, it says a lot that she’s never apologized. I suspect it’s a combination of guilt and white American privilege (i.e. lack of expectation that she apologize).

      • Sarah says:

        There was evidence, though. Her testimony is evidence. Of course the police denied it all. Wouldn’t it have been helpful if they’d recorded it all so they could have evidence to back up their denials? In my book, cops who don’t record their interrogations do not get the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately, courts and prosecutors side with cops without requiring any evidence beyond their word.

      • questions says:

        Wouldn’t an apology make her liable?

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Its all a very sad situation – everyone involved has had their lives ruined and they all deserve peace.

        With regards to Patrick – he left Italy to start a new life in Poland as due to the accusations he couldn’t continue to live in Italy. He is understandably quite bitter about the whole situation. I get the sense from the articles below that an apology or even an acknowledgement from Amanda would mean a great deal to him and maybe help him heal. He is just as much a victim of the police as she and Rafaelle are. He deserves the same recognition.

        https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/28/amanda-knox-free-rich-american-patrick-lumumba-meredith-kercher-murder

        https://www.bustle.com/articles/186077-where-is-patrick-lumumba-now-the-bar-owner-was-implicated-by-amanda-knox

      • Isabella says:

        She apologized IN COURT. Way to troll her.

      • superashes says:

        They questioned her for over ten hours a day, with a shitty translator, with no attorney present under the bullshit logic that she was a “witness” but not a “suspect”, but sure, lets give those police (who also beat Patrick when they brought him in while making racist comments) the benefit of the doubt on whether they were also hitting her … Let’s also ignore the fact that they refused to investigate the circumstances of the false accusation against Patrick despite it being requested by her own attorneys.

    • Sarah says:

      You’re partially correct about how her boss’ name came up. Police had physical evidence that a black man was involved (turns out the evidence they had was from the actual killer, Rudy Guede). So they demanded Amanda think of black men she knew and that’s how the boss came up. Then they saw she had texted him that evening signing off “See you later,” which the Italian police took not in the casual American way but as a definite plan that she would be seeing him later that evening. As so often happens in cases like this, they yelled, took advantage of language barriers, confusion, sleep deprivation, etc, and encouraged her to picture the scene of Meredith’s murder with the assumption the boss must have been there because she had plans to see him later. Within hours, after getting away from the interrogators where eye could actually think, she clearly said what police had gotten her to imagine hadn’t actually happened.

      But it’s easier to vilify the young woman than try to understand the actual facts or how easy it is for someone in that situation to be manipulated into making some vague statement of imagination that gets transformed into a legitimate accusation of murder.

      • LBB says:

        Thank you! Many people also confess to crimes they did not commit because of interrogation abuse.

      • LBB says:

        Thank you! Many people also confess to crimes they did not commit because of interrogation abuse.

      • Sarah says:

        LBB- I know that all too well.

        In this particular case, what makes me angry is people accusing the white girl of pointing the finger at a black man as if she came up with that idea Susan Smith-style when in reality the police told her a black man was involved (the one thing they were actually right about) and it was then also the police who focused on on her boss based on their text exchange from the night of the murder. Context is really important here.

      • LBB says:

        I do think you made an excellent point Sarah, context is important here.

      • Veronica S. says:

        As awful as getting her boss dragged into this was, context aside, I’m also like…she served FOUR YEARS for a crime she didn’t commit. At what point does it finally balance out for people? Is it not enough that she had her life destroyed?

      • superashes says:

        Thank you. The bad actor on that bullshit accusation was the police department, point blank and period. They knew exactly what they were doing. They held him for weeks after she recanted the statement. There is a reason why the Supreme Court described the investigation as a sensational failure.

  14. EviesMom says:

    Whoa. Amanda might have been an asshole 20 year old foreign student but that in no way excuses the poor detective work of the Italian police. She did not kill Meredith full stop.

    I am glad she made the articulate statement above. She is not wrong . She was a victim of the Italian legal system & some serious ingrained global misogyny. You don’t have to ‘like’ someone for them to be innocent of a crime. This whole sordid crime should be about Meredith and how long it took to find her murderer. Instead she is a footnote to her own murder.

    Ps there is no handbook / directions to foreign awkward ladies on how to respond when you roommate is horrifically murdered during your student exchange. I checked.

    • Bettyrose says:

      LOL @ no handbook. And even if there were presumably it’s okay to buy underwear when you’re locked out of your apartment for days? Without the world calling you a “slut” 15 years later for wearing clean undies? 🤦🏻‍♀️

  15. Mina_Esq says:

    If they hadn’t acknowledge that the story was inspired by her ordeal, then there would be people complaining about that too. You can’t win in these situations. As an aside, it’s a a bit absurd to suggest that it should say it was inspired by Meredith’s murder. The narrative revolves around the person falsely accused of murder, rather than the murder victim. The story is not about the murder; it’s about the disaster that befell the family of the person accused of that murder. They are two very different storylines.

    • questions says:

      How much is based on her? If it’s very loose, I can see why she’s bothered. It’s creating a perception of her she little control over. She always presents her written statements well, so it’s interesting how people (in this case, writers, directors, producers?) assume she wouldn’t advocate for herself. She’s trained in journalism and you can tell. I never come away thinking she’s written something poorly. The rest (i.e her personality, mannerisms,, affect) — I don’t have much of an opinion on. But I’m always struck by how well she’s able to defend herself in written form.

    • Jayna says:

      Exactly.

    • questions says:

      Looking at the trailer, it seems as though the movie focuses on Matt Damon’s character. I wasn’t expecting that.

  16. Gillysirl says:

    I am surprised and disgusted by some of the comments regarding Amanda Knox. This story is about a powerful man, using her name in a way that takes away acknowledgement of the victim, she pushed back and say you need to focus on the victim and the murderer, and some of you are “yeah, but she’s a slut who used drugs”. WTAF. Way to distort who’s actually in the wrong in this story. I applaud her for pushing back.

    • Pusspants says:

      This ^^!
      How did many of the comments here move quickly to how she is still guilty because of her supposed strange behavior? I’m appalled that some people seem to think they know what reasonable behavior is in a bizarre & traumatic situation like this. As someone said above, there’s no playbook for how to respond correctly to the news your roommate was murdered while you are studying abroad. And the slut-shaming is disgusting. That and the lack of logical, measured analysis make me think less of some of the commenters on here. I appreciate those who offered more respectful, intelligent responses.

  17. Robin says:

    I think it says everything about the unfair treatment of women in cases like this that barely anything is said about Raffaele Sollecito. Surely these anti Knox statements should be shared? Or is the femme fatale so potent, even amongst women, that he barely ever gets a mention.

    • questions says:

      I do think there’s sexism at play. But I think his being Italian, rather than American, might be why he’s slightly forgotten. I suspect in Italy he probably faces more scrutiny. If he were American or British, I wonder what the coverage of him would be like. The story is covered differently by each country’s media (i.e American, British, Italian).

      • Robin says:

        That’s a really good point, questions. Thing is, when they left the court after both being convicted, the Italian crowds were shouting for Knox to be killed. I can’t remember anything about his being executed. I wonder, however, what has happened since. Are there any Italian posters who would know?

  18. jdinoak says:

    Wow – these comments are shocking the hell out of me……slutting around, jinky, weird, ‘brought it on herself’…..

    I thought after reading the first comment, the people reading would call them out – but I did not expect so many reaffirming this take….If this is how we advocate for someone’s agency over their name/story, we’re fucked

  19. Lara says:

    The comments in here are disgusting. You can absolutely tell who’s been brainwashed by a media narrative.

    • jdinoak says:

      Agree @lara….I’m really taken aback by this….I did not expect it on this blog….

    • Isabella says:

      Agree. It’s so gross.

    • Gillysirl says:

      And yet everyone notices when the media skews the Sussex story. Do we think it only applies to one woman?

    • superashes says:

      Yup. I’m amazed by all the commenters that seemingly think her accusation against Patrick was some sort of casual thing she uttered, and not a clear product of police misconduct as well.

      • teaholic says:

        Patrick slutshamed her after his suit against the cops fizzled. He helped that narrative along.

  20. detritus says:

    I can’t imagine seeing countless documentaries and media pieces on your trauma. And people, big names, profiting off of it, but not giving you a cent.

    I feel so badly for how Knox has been treated, from the sexist police to the lack of support now.

  21. Isabella says:

    I wish Matt Damon would change up his game. Play a villain or take any role in which he isn’t rescuing women (who could rescue themselves if he got out of the way). He used to be a good actor and it’s become a tried trope.

    I have a feeling this film fails the Bechtel test. Aside from the daughter and the forced romantic interest (ew), there don’t seem to be any women in the film. Certainly none with agency who could turn things around without Matt’s help. He needs to do the rescuing!

    Amanda had plenty of help from her mother, sisters, girl friends and a powerhouse female Italian lawyer, as well as from her dad and step-dad and scientists who were appalled by the botched DNA tests. These were well-educated people who used the court system, Internet and scientific evidence. None of them were MAGA flag wavers from Oklahoma (another tired trope).

  22. Same says:

    Between this and the ScarJo thread the facade has finally crumbled.

    • Susan says:

      I had the same thought…It frightens me how we can be so empathetic and understanding of Meghan Markle and Harry and yet zero empathy for Amanda Knox, Monica Lewinsky and Scarlett Johansson.

      • Maria says:

        I have no comment on these stories because I know little about them (although my sympathy is for Lewinsky; I know nothing about Knox but certainly will never agree with anyone slut-shaming etc) but on the Scarlett Johansson thread there were only two or three condemning comments. The rest supported her; as they should since it’s a contractual issue.
        As for her personally rather than professionally, I have little sympathy for her because of what she said about Woody Allen. Whatever sympathy you feel Scarlett deserves in her personal life, Dylan Farrow deserves more (and an apology, if Scarlett is so devoted to victims’ rights as she claims).

      • Same says:

        See also any Gaga, Taylor Swift or Carrie Underwood thread. Basically any woman that isn’t MM, Serena or Angie.

      • Maria says:

        Going back through archived posts and am not seeing what you say at all.

    • Kkat says:

      Yep, though I’m not surprised by who the commenters are doing it.
      Soupie is always like this, the others are on my hmmm list because of the things they say sometimes.

    • Otaku fairy says:

      There wasn’t much left there to crumble. It’s been the norm on all these sites for people to blame women for everything from hate crimes to human trafficking over their love lives, outfits, and other dumb shit. But a lot of people did call the misogyny out, which is good.

  23. questions says:

    I just watched the trailer. I can see why she’s annoyed. There are elements of her life in this and other elements added in (I think?). The story seems to center more around Matt Damon so it does seem disingenuous to pull her name in as part of the promotion. Not really sure why they did. We can discern the story has elements of her life in it but probably isn’t a complete replication so using her name does seem like a way to get PR for the movie through her name. Not even sure why they did that. The movie looks like it could get viewers in with Matt Damon’s name alone. And often times elements are borrowed but the direct use of her name in the promotion makes it easier to critique what they’ve done here.

  24. jferber says:

    I would like to dissent from the general opinion. I believe Amanda Knox was one of the murderers of the victim (along with two others). Gossip sites are not juries that need to be 100% in agreement.

    • teaholic says:

      The DNA pointed to just one person, Rudy Guede.

    • Well Wisher says:

      Meridith’s relatives believe that Amanda played a role in her death. They see her release from prison as denial of justice for their daughter/sister’s murder and was horrified that she would even mentioned their relative name. Imagine how they are feeling right now.

      • nina says:

        That is unfortunate that they refuse to accept scientific proof. Sometimes grieve can make you want to believe and hold onto something that is not true.
        I hope they find peace but it has been proven through scientific evidence that she was not involved. She deserves to live her life without this falsehood that she was somehow involved being perpetuated

      • Well Wisher says:

        Meridith’s relatives have a right to their feelings in regards to their daughter/sister’s death and the subsequent murder trial. It is their belief that their sister was denied justice. They have conducted themselves with dignity throughout this ordeal and made one simple request that Amanda do not mention their daughter/sister’s name publicly. It is doable. She can make her case whilst honouring their wishes.

  25. Bobafelty says:

    I lived in Italy the year before Knox was there, very close to the town she was in. The Italians, especially the men, had strong negative perceptions of American women. Italian men out at the bars at night would ask my friends and I to go home with them, and were almost always shocked when we turned them down. Truly shocked. We started asking them why they were so surprised we weren’t going going to sleep with near strangers and got the same responses every time…”we watch Friends and know American girls are all sluts who will do anything”, “tv shows us all American girls are total sluts”, etc. It was not surprising to me at all that the Italian police had these same sexist attitudes towards Knox as an American woman.

    • Pinellas Pixie says:

      Wow. This is really eye-opening. I really had no idea. Thank you.

    • A.Key says:

      American women don’t have a good reputation in Korea too. You get hit on by sleaze bags a lot who naturally assume you will immediately have sex with them because Western women are “easy” as per all the tourist behavior and pop culture apparently….yeah….

  26. A.Key says:

    I don’t know if she killed Meredith, but I don’t think she’s a nice person honestly. Not because of her sex life (good for her) or even her drug abuse (which was illegal), but because she lied after the murder happened and she showed zero compassion for the horror that poor Meredith went through. It was always all about Amanda and she made herself the number one victim from the beginning.
    I think that’s why most people didn’t like her then and that’s what contributed to the initial convictions.
    I’m also not sure why she’s mad now about this movie? Is it about the fact she’s not getting a cut from the paycheck?

    • questions says:

      I don’t think she wrote a formal article. She tweeted her thoughts. I think she has a right to an opinion about a movie that uses her name in the promotion. Regardless of money, it would likely feel weird to have one’s name randomly partnered with something without prior knowledge. The movie seems to focus on Matt Damon’s character which makes randomly throwing her name into the promotion a little stranger.

      I don’t necessarily think she’s “likable” (whatever that means in the case of an ordinary, non-celebrity person who suddenly gets accused of murder) and from a surface point of view I can see why people don’t take to her much, but I have my doubts I’d behave differently if I were in prison in a foreign country. I’d likely be functioning from the point of view of self-preservation. The nice and compassionate thing to do would be to think of the murder victim but I wonder how much being in prison suddenly makes someone more focused on their own self and survival.

      For the rest of her life, there are always going to be some people who think she did it. And I can imagine that would also make me more self-focused, feeling as though people are looking at and judging me strangely. I’d probably always be on the defensive trying to prove something.

    • lanne says:

      Good god. Another troll. Since when does a persons unlikeability trump an utter lack of evidence plus gross police misconduct? Who gives a shit how nice of a person she is or isn’t. The truth is that she didn’t kill her roommate.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      1. She didn’t kill her roommate and someone did confess with evidence to prove it.
      2. Drug abuse does not make you a bad person. Why mention it?
      3. Her “lies” were from the highly discredited interrogation that was shoddy and never properly documented under extreme duress.
      4. Her lack of empathy to some standards can be explained by the heightened fear for her safety and freedom along with her aspergers.
      5. Where is she saying she wants a paycheck?
      If this happened to me I’d demand a consult at least before this director starts name dropping me as a connection to this story while also claiming it’s not the same story.

      She’s an easy target to go after though. Didn’t we just all cover this mentality in Teigen vs. Stodden?

      • Shanaynay says:

        I think she got her paycheck when she asked for donations for her wedding. What a loser!!!

      • equality says:

        She didn’t deserve to be railroaded by the police. The wedding thing was what all kinds of people do everyday with GoFundMe. It’s voluntary though so anybody who didn’t want to didn’t have to contribute. Being jailed wasn’t voluntary.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Shanaynay
        So, by your judgement/logic anyone who goes on a site that requests items or donations for their wedding, registry, honeymoon are losers? That’s nearly everyone who ever got married.

  27. Shanaynay says:

    Sorry, don’t feel one ounce of sympathy for Amanda.

    Maybe she’ll ask for more donations like she did for her wedding (https://nypost.com/2019/07/22/amanda-knox-asks-donors-for-10000-to-pay-for-wedding/) to help fund herself because she’s mad!!!

    Phuck her!!!!

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      I’ll pray for you.

    • lemontwist says:

      ??? Where is your outrage/hostility toward her coming from? Might be a good question for you to ask yourself. Or if you’re just trolling, maybe reflect on why you need to do that.

      As for the wedding donations, this was their comment:
      “Let’s face it, we don’t need any more stuff. [...] What we do need is help putting on the best party ever for our family and friends!”

      Asking for cash/donations in lieu of gifts from a wedding registry is not at all uncommon in the US, especially as more and more people cohabitate before getting married. It’s not like a couple living together for years needs a breadmaker and knife set.

      They got legally married and then asked for donations to help fund the reception party at a later date. NBD

      • teaholic says:

        Her parents mortgaged their houses—-for a second time——and her grandmother took out a huge loqn to pay for the staggering legal bills. Nobody wants to talk about that.

    • detritus says:

      Why does that make her a bad person?

    • Monette says:

      This is the custom at every wedding I have ever attended in my country and in most east european countries.
      They provide you with an envelope and pen for the cash and to write your name on it. It’s all very out in the open.
      Are we all mad then??

    • teaholic says:

      Her parents had to sell their house and go into debt to defend her. That’s what nobody realizes about justice. You can be as innocent as a newborn, but lawyers cost money, and good ones cost lots of money. She had to write a book and do talks and stuff to give her parents back some semblance of a life.

      Nobody talks about that. It’s like nobody wants to admit they diet, either. Nobody wants to hear about how there’s no happy endings, just bankruptcy and lawyer bills. People won’t buy books from women, especially, that are perceived as complaining. There’s no such thing as injustice when a woman’s accused.

  28. lemontwist says:

    Damn. This thread is a depressing read. Slut-shaming, mental disorder shaming, sanctimony, good old-fashioned schadenfreude.

    Not saying that AK is above any criticism but few (if any) of these comments seem like they’re intended in good faith towards a discussion, rather people just want to get some misogynistic vitriol out and AK will always be an easy target for that.

    • Pusspants says:

      Thank you for adding a balanced, kind, nuanced and intelligent perspective in your posts on this topic. Reading some of them made me so angry that I questioned whether I would continue coming on this site anymore if this is how many commenters really think.

      • lemontwist says:

        Thanks for that 💛 I think (hope?) that it’s not actually very many people, just a handful with reallllly bad takes.

  29. Kkat says:

    Wow the majority of the comments here are disgusting.
    Slut shaming? really?
    and She is on the spectrum, so am I and my kids… so should we be accused of murder because we are odd and quirky? I guarantee my younger son would have a very flat affect if he were accused of something and would have bizarre behaviors. While otherwise seeming perfectly normal. His stuff comes out when he’s stressed.

  30. Rnot says:

    A person who uses the term “slutting around” immediately reveals that they are worse than the subject of the remark. A person who uses that phrase is a person who hurts women.

  31. nina says:

    Thank god we no longer burn witches at the stake. Otherwise Amanda would not be here to tell her side. What happened to her was horrible.

    Yes a woman lost her life, but the prosecutors and police, in their puritanical view of how a woman should be behave should bear all the blame for this eff up.

    Amanda behaved like any young woman who has been allowed to be her own person, but she was crucified for it. I hope she eventually can move on.