For those of you NOT in London, please watch on Hulu / Disney+ if you haven't already!
www.hulu.com/movie/mouth-...
Posts by Amanda Knox
Movie poster for Mouth of the Wolf
London! I'll be hosting a screening of my documentary, Mouth of the Wolf, on April 21 & 22 at the Greenwich Picturehouse along with the London Innocence Project. Tickets are required, but free (links below). I'll be doing a Q&A with @wisecracker.bsky.social afterwards. Please come / spread the word!
Not gonna lie. You’ve got a career in front of mattress stores and car dealerships if you need some extra bucks.
Fair! It's also got calendar advantage against this atheist.
Dance battle. Who won, the chick or the egg?
Young Abe Lincoln: Tell me how to avoid death.
Witch: Beware a man named "John Wilkes Mezzanine, Row C, Seat 13."
*Old Lincoln arrives at Ford's Theater*
Usher: We have some room in the mezzanine, sir.
Lincoln: Oh no no no. Do you have a booth?
Ms. Knox was thrust into the public eye though a set of tragedies, and she has made sense of it through compassion for others.
I would call her fearless, but that's not quite right. I think she has healthy fear and overcomes it.
Give this music video a few minutes.
Never in a thousand years will you find the message I've hidden in this video. Gonna fail, I'm telling you. Give it a try. You won't find it. Upend your expectations.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfaE...
When someone (and especially a woman) is convicted of a heinous crime, their character thoroughly assassinated, daring to question the public consensus puts a target on your back. Meet the "misfits and ghouls" who first doubted Lucy Letby's guilt.
open.spotify.com/episode/1FgB...
It's real, I swear!
I'll be performing comedy in Seattle at Hugo House as part of the Collections live magazine, April 1. See you there!
www.arielbasom.com/collections
OK, I have now binge-watched both Twisted Tale and Mouth of the Wolf, and they are amazing, compelling works.
I admire your courage, and am amazed at how much grace you give to Magnini, the man who wrongly convicted you and ruined your reputation before the world.
You rock, Ms. Knox.
Deeply and intimately, from day zero.
Please do!
...about the psychology of offense, the fragility of beliefs, and why learning not to be “capturable” by other people’s actions, no matter how offensive, is essential for living freely. So I recorded an audio essay on the subject. Enjoy!
open.substack.com/pub/amandakn...
After a stranger on X told me “Jesus, put on some makeup,” I responded with a joke: an AI image of Jesus wearing makeup and a one-word reply, “Fine.” The tweet did numbers, drawing both laughter and accusations of blasphemy. And it got me thinking...
If you want to hear more about the prosecution's case, and how her trial began, listen to episode 4 of Doubt: The Case of Lucy Letby, out now.
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t...
This is not an argument that the prosecution's theory is wrong, or that Letby is innocent. But it is important context for understanding how this case was built and why it unfolded the way it did.
So here's the questions I keep coming back to: would the Letby trial have been one of the longest murder trials in British history if the evidence against her had been stronger? And does the length itself tell us something about what the prosecution was, and wasn't, working with?
With his DNA all over the crime scene, and an obvious motive, no circumstantial, inferential or character arguments were necessary to determine his guilt.
In my own trial, my lawyers always argued that 0+0+0 = 0. But the story woven by the prosecution over 11 months was powerful. By contrast, Meredith Kercher's actual killer, Rudy Guede, had a fast-track trial, far shorter than mine.
The prosecution constructed a character narrative about who Lucy was to make the inferential chain feel inevitable to the jury. That takes months to build in a courtroom.
And in the absence of a smoking gun, or even a recurring modus operandi (the prosecution presented half a dozen different supposed methods of murder), the story has to do the work that evidence can't.
In both cases, the prosecution avoided motive almost entirely. Letby was simply "evil." When I was wrongly convicted, the judge said my motive was "Evil for evil's sake." When the evidence doesn't support a coherent motive, that "evil" tends to become the answer.
I know something about that kind of trial. My own wrongful conviction was also built on circumstantial and inferential evidence, with no direct evidence tying me to the crime. I'm not saying Letby's case is the same as mine; I'm saying I recognize the architecture.
Part of the answer is the sheer number of charges. Another part is that the prosecution relied on expert witnesses interpreting complicated medical & statistical evidence, & had to spend months constructing an inferential chain, link by link, because there was no smoking gun.
The trial of #LucyLetby for the murders and attempted murders of infants in the neonatal ward of the Countess of Chester Hospital was one of the longest murder trials in British history. It's worth asking why.
/thread
I enjoyed speaking with The Independent about the #LucyLetby case.
www.the-independent.com/news/people/...
Already got my tickets!