Options
Amanda Knox defence fund
fefster
Posts: 7,388
Forum Member
✭
This is not about her innocence or guilt, there is another thread on that and it's been done to death.
What do you think about Knox's defence fund which she appears to still be collecting for here: http://www.amandaknox.com/blog/
Do you think she should still be collecting? Is it fair enough due to the costs she incurred or is it in bad taste?
My thoughts are, I would like to know how much has been collected and what it has been spent on. I wonder if it is a registered charity.
What do you think about Knox's defence fund which she appears to still be collecting for here: http://www.amandaknox.com/blog/
Do you think she should still be collecting? Is it fair enough due to the costs she incurred or is it in bad taste?
My thoughts are, I would like to know how much has been collected and what it has been spent on. I wonder if it is a registered charity.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
[not that i think it`s a matter of taste anyway].
No I don't think she should be collecting, and yes immensely bad taste..and as you say, irrespective of guilt or innocence.
Compare and contrast her with a confirmed UK victim of crime - Alan Barnes.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2932772/Disabled-pensioner-Alan-Barnes-given-12-000-wishers-shock-mugging.html
He didn't try to collect money, instead it was the wonderful Katie Cutler who set up the fund that went viral. And even then, it was the victim Alan who pulled the plug on the fundraising when it reached £330,000 in record time..because he felt guilty about accepting seemingly endless amounts of money.
An inspirational man and fund raiser (Katie) vs someone who is seemingly out to collect money from everyone and anyone prepared to give her money. Her story alone is set to make her rich, and the appeal smacks of greed to the nth degree.
it`s a small donate button in the top corner.
What a strange analogy, Alan Barnes isn't defending himself from a murder charge in a foreign country as far as I am aware
This is probably a better comparison from the UK.
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/hundreds-of-supporters-turn-out-to-raise-125779
It's an apt analogy in terms of highlighting the difference between someone with principles, and someone who has none.
Abstract a correlation in cases admittedly. The basic tenent holds up in terms of shining a light on someone who is decent vs someone who is now assured a very successful financial future due to the publicity garnered.
she was put in prison for 4 years for a crime she didnt commit. all your posts says is that people are different and everybody already knows that. some people fight for themselves while others just take it and move on. i'd be wanting millions if i was in her shoes
Will I be donating, no. Would I ever donate in a case like this, perhaps for eg Barry George and I certainly wouldn't see it as him attempting to profit from someone's death.
What is in bad taste IMO is people continuing to punish someone who has been punished for 7 years and will continue to be affected for the rest of her life for a crime she didn't comit.
Ok, its difficult to keep up the hatred in light of the final ruling but don't think this should be used as an opportunity to continue to "bash" Amanda.
And would that include you setting up a fund for money from the public, despite the certainty that your case is going to bring in more money from the media alone, than you would ever earn or rightfully claim from a court for wrongful imprisonment..??
As you say, you'd be wanting millions in her shoes. You just fail spectacularly at reading between the lines. This young lady is a walking piggy bank, knows it and still has the front to put up a page for donations.
If you don't get a read from that as to the person, then so be it. She is not the first person wrongly convicted of a crime, who had to start again. Most don't use the publicity to try and claw money from the public - especially those who know full well that they now are a commodity which will see them financially much better off than they could have ever imagined - minus the public donations.
It was the same publicity which has destroyed her life and will ensure she is never forgotten, why shouldn't she turn that into a positive if she needs it. When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.
Her "fundraising" is a small donation button, not international appeals. There is no bleeding hearts or pressure to hand over money.
what are you talking about me "failing spectacularly"
she is free to set this fund up for money just to make herself rich(and so what?) and people are free to donate if they chose to or not
get over it, nobody is forcing you to donate
Good Grief.
This is why those with no morals or care bar their own financial gain set up things like this.
Will always be those either prepared to donate or advocate on their behalf.
It's scary that people can view this as you do..well more depressing really - but this reality is what feeds those who are hungry for one thing above all else - money from anyone naieve enough to give it.
BiB..Are there kingsize buttons for greedy people ?
Not international ? It's on her blog - is that limited to certain nations then ?
you have a choice to donate, do you not?
Kudos on missing the point entirely. You should take up failing to acknowledge the truth and initial point someone makes as a profession...I'd possibly even pay into your campaign fund to set this venture up.
It's the mindset annette. I've stated this 3 times already..just the mindset involved.
Are you missing the point that an innocent person has lost 7 years of her life and will continue to have people view her as a murderer. She now has to pay for her defense and plan for her own future.
people have sold themselves and their experiences since before jesus alleged christ started selling his ways.
ideas
clothes
opinions
food
arts
health
water
all these are sold and bought every day you can buy any, all or none of these, why is her legal bill different?
in what way is it different from a shopkeeper making a profit?
Actually, 3 of those years were for "Perverting the Course of Justice", which she did commit.
She falsely accused a totally innocent man of committing the murder.
LoL...No wonder people will donate their money.
She has a future where money will not be an issue, and more fool anyone thinking otherwise. Anyone with an IQ exceeding their shoe size will be able to determine that this is someone out to make money from anyone..not just those who should pay.
When I do get some spare money to donate, rest assured it will be to an organisation or cause which is selfless..not selfish. Alan Barnes pulled the plug on the fund-raising for what happened to him because he is a man not looking to bleed every last penny from those who sympathise with what happened to him.
Someone I respect because his actions are indicative of those of someone who deserves to be respected.
Knox spent 7 years inside for something she is now clear of, and will earn masses of money..yet - whether or not you choose to donate - still has that inherent greed to 'offer' people to give her money.
That is what seperates them, and for me I see past the story - I look at the person vs their actions..therein you get an insight to the person and mindset.
Some persons may just have trouble accepting that she was found innocent of the crime, and seem to be looking for petty points to get her on.