32 Responses to LA Times Op-Ed: What do I owe Donald Trump?

  1. rpm says:

    “Donald Trump supported me when I was wrongly accused of murder. What do I owe him?

    Simple thanks.

  2. Luara says:

    Apparently Trump contributed some money to Amanda’s defense, and people are using that to claim that her politics should change in a pro-Trump direction because of that.
    But other people also contributed money to Amanda’s defense.
    By that same logic, Amanda should align her politics with THEIR politics, because of that. And probably many of those people were Democrats.
    After all, why should Trump’s dollar go any further in buying Amanda’s loyalty, than someone else’s dollar???

  3. no name says:

    I feel a need to remind you that you have responsibilities. There is a group that follows you that are outliers yet not stalkers, such as myself. Just genuinely concerned real people. And this blog is the best most trusted avenue for some measure of reassurance. Are you OK?

  4. Tom Zupancic says:

    A friend of mine who was also the victim of an unjust prosecution is an artist, a musician. He composed this piece…
    Starlight Starbright

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa60aWLHXDY&feature=youtu.be

    It will be okay.

  5. justme says:

    I consider myself someone who supports your innocence. I was surprised by how much your ordeal moved me. I wrote to my legislators and the State Department, and I celebrated with you in spirit when you were both safely home and the Supreme Court issued its final ruling. But I never expected anything for my support. That just seems odd to me. Yes, empathy was a part of it. But it is also in my own self interest to demand a judicial system that is accountable, compassionate, and fact based. Frankly, we owe you the ‘thank you’ because you fought the good fight, shed light on injustice, and have been kind enough to share with us your personal recovery. So, thank you.

  6. Tom Mininger says:

    Amanda, thank you for bringing and keeping attention on wrongful conviction cases like the Central Park 5. You have a powerful sense of loyalty to those who have endured what you have. This case, like yours and so many others, is a calling for all police interviews/interrogations to be recorded. These five teenagers were interrogated for days under the presumption of guilt. Of course they are going to break. The psychological torture will not stop until they do. Et voila, the final “admission” was recorded. What about everything else that went on in that interrogation room?

    Years later , the serial rapist and murderer Matias Reyes confesses to the rape of Trisha Meili from prison. He always worked alone. The crime scene DNA sample tests confirm his confession. No DNA samples ever implicated the Central Park Five. That’s 0 for 5. Reyes, like other predators, went on to murder after this rape, while we were distracted persecuting the innocent.

    This case, like yours and so many others, also exposes the power of confirmation bias. How hard it is for we humans to admit our mistakes. Especially when we’ve placed our reputations on the line.

    These cases are also a calling to parents to never let your kid (or yourself) be interviewed without a lawyer.

    • jerry says:

      Matias Reyes “confession” does not mean the Central Park 5 are completely innocent. In fact, the testimonies of the CP5 fit perfectly with Reyes involvement. They said the “Puerto Rican kid did it (how would they know that if they didn’t at least see him doing the rape?)” and that none of them actually raped her, they only helped beat her and smashed her with a rock you understand. They “only” did those things so it wasn’t so bad. You should research the details of what happened that evening. The CP5 (and likely Reyes also) were in a large group of 30 or so black and latino thugs roaming through Central Park assaulting and robbing white people at random. One man was beaten so badly he looked like he had been dunked in blood. During their rampage they left a trail of beaten victims.

      They actually were telling a reasonable approximation of what happened, but there are some contradictory and confusing accounts, though you have to consider that a group of 30 or so people roaming about in the dark that may not have known some of the others personally and may have splintered off or had others join the group throughout are going to have a hard time giving an 100% accurate accounting of who was where and when.

      We will never know the precise details we can surmise this much: As the group was “wilding” through Central Park they encountered Ms. Meili, either they started beating her and Reyes raped her or perhaps they came upon Reyes already raping Ms. Meili and just “helped” beat her. Are we supposed to believe that as they were robbing and beating everybody they encountered that they suddenly and gallantly stopped when they encountered Ms. Meili? Such gentleman. Reyes was probably running with the group or lurking on the periphery when they encountered Ms. Meili. All 5 may not have participated in the beating, nobody knows for sure, perhaps a couple of them just watched, perhaps there were others out of the group of 30 that were involved but never got identified, but for the ones that just watched and did nothing I have no sympathy for. Just because Reyes had operated as a lone wolf before doesn’t mean he couldn’t at that evening linked up with a group of violent thugs.

      Remember, this was 1989, touch dna was not possible or even known then so we don’t know what the evidence protocols were for those days since it was the dawn of dna testing. So just because dna was found from Reye’s sexual assault doesn’t mean they didn’t help beat Ms. Meili nearly to death. Dna in this case is being treated as some sort of divine definitive but the reality is, though the media won’t say it, it doesn’t disprove involvement in the beating, just the rape, exactly as the Central Park 5 had told police.

      I don’t know why Reyes decided to take the full blame for the assault but remember that there are systems of obligations and favors among convicts that we know nothing of, Reyes may have simply been paying off a debt and since he was in prison for life anyways it wouldn’t change the length of his sentence.

      Not everybody confesses under intense interrogations. Look up the case of Timothy Masters who in 1985, was convicted of the murder of Peggy Hettrick, in spite of being only 15 yrs old and subjected to a long intense interrogation he never once broke down and confessed. Police lied to him, told him they had evidence against him and tried every trick in the book but he never buckled. He was convicted anyways but dna evidence eventually completely exonerated him.

      Also, one of the Central Park 5 did go on to an illustrious career in rape when he was convicted of a rape and sent to prison for it. Clearly at least one of them had the propensity, though he waited a little longer than that night in Central Park to actually do one himself. If the case of Reyes going on to rape and murder again, is evidence you are guilt of “something” before then I guess at least one of the Central Park 5 must have been involved.

      The Central Park 5 case became a cause de celebre in which people could pose and posteur as noble anti racists, thereby obscuring the brutal vicious beating, rape and near murder of an innocent white woman, which is typical for liberals in this country to do. Make the black men the victims, even though the black men in this case were clearly vicious racist violent thugs, something that would still be true even if they weren’t actually involved in any way the assault on Ms. Meili.

      So why would anybody take up the cause of a gang of vicious violent racist thugs but not the many other dna exoneration cases? There are cases where dna does definitively prove innocence, yet I don’t see them getting the kind of media exposure this case does. Interestingly, the only cases I’ve ever seen to get major attention are when they involve black men. White men who are falsely convicted don’t seem to get the same kind of attention or celebrity status. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.

    • Tom Mininger says:

      jerry-
      The vast majority of falsely convicted black men, white men, white women, black women, etc. are not involved in high profile cases and therefore languish in prison with little attention.
      https://www.innocenceproject.org/
      The CP5 case went high profile on day one just like Amanda’s did.

      “In fact, the testimonies of the CP5 fit perfectly with Reyes involvement.” I could not disagree with you more.

      The DA: “A comparison of the statements reveals troubling discrepancies. … The accounts given by the five defendants differed from one another on the specific details of virtually every major aspect of the crime—who initiated the attack, who knocked the victim down, who undressed her, who struck her, who held her, who raped her, what weapons were used in the course of the assault, and when in the sequence of events the attack took place. … In many other respects the defendants’ statements were not corroborated by, consistent with, or explanatory of objective, independent evidence. And some of what they said was simply contrary to established fact.”

      This is what happens over and over again with guilt presumptive interrogations. 28% of DNA exoneration cases involve false confessions. You cherry pick Timothy Masters. I can cherry pick police veterans who succumbed to the disorientation of interrogation and falsely confessed. But’s it’s well established how interrogation procedures obtain the desired result regardless of guilt or innocence. Saul Kassin and Richard Leo are 2 researchers worth googling, but imo the most powerful explanations come from detectives who have engaged in it themselves:
      https://www.amazon.com/Police-Generate-False-Confessions-Interrogation-ebook/dp/B01IUD171Y/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1497910168&sr=1-1&keywords=jim+trainum

      Every ‘perhaps’, ‘probably’, ‘may not have’, ‘may have’ you insert into your “account” reduces it’s reliability exponentially. It’s hard for me to invite readers to study the horror of Matias Reyes’ history. But it’s important to understand that there are predators like him in our world.

      • jerry says:

        Tom
        I use qualifiers when there is something I can’t state for certain. At least I’m honest enough to know when there’s something I can’t prove. However, there are some things I can be sure of and in those cases I will state it directly.
        I don’t agree with Anne Coulter on much but she did do a good job of summarizing the CP5 case, and supplying actual facts the media isn’t reporting:
        http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2014-04-23.html
        OK, you’re going to say bad things about Coulter, and I might even agree with a lot, and she also thinks Amanda is guilty (she’s flat out wrong there, but it doesn’t mean she isn’t right about the CP5), but the information she supplied is legitimate and available if you dig around for it. Don’t talk about the dna, or lack thereof, until you can explain the dna gathering protocols for 1989, in that era there was no touch dna, only fluids in sufficient quantity could be tested.

        As for the conflicting accounts, you have to keep in mind that 3 dozen punks were interviewed, they would have been motivated to point fingers at others and create details in order to deflect attention from themselves, besides as I said before, and you ignored, it was dark and a pack of thugs who may or may not know each other randomly beating people could easily be confused and not remembering things correctly and something tells me these kind aren’t detail oriented types. What we are looking at is details that that they shouldn’t know, for instance “The Peurto Rican kid raped her”. They couldn’t have known that if they weren’t at least observing, and if they were close enough to be observing I’m having a hard time believing they weren’t participating, at least some of them.

        It’s interesting when you read current media accounts, 99% of which love to broadcast “wrongfully convicted black men”, how they consistently ignore the what the CP5 and their homies were doing BEFORE encountering Ms. Meili, just like you did in both of your comments. Is it a stretch to believe that a pack of violent racist black and latino thugs who were randomly assaulting and robbing every white person they encounter would suddenly stop when they came across a young pretty white female? OK, that’s not “evidence” but when you actually realize there is physical and witness evidence it’s obvious they are guilty of attempted murder at least.

        There was blood and evidence on them and there were corroborating witnesses that weren’t even running with the mob. The media is conveniently ignoring those details and focusing on the politically correct aspect of “black men wrongfully convicted”. When you run searches on stories about the CP5 there’s practically nothing with any real details about what happened, it’s all about some sort of “injustice”. I think the real injustice was the near murder of Trisha Meili and the violent thugs that did it now being treated as heroes.

        If you want to be technical about it, yes they were wrongfully convicted of rape because their assault did not actually include sexual penetration but they were still violent, racist thugs who were recreationally assaulting random people and capped off their rampage with nearly beatingTrisha Meili to death, yet thanks to PC racial politics they are now being hailed as some kind of martyrs. The focus of this case should not be that they were “falsely” convicted of rape, because yes, they “technically” didn’t sexually penetrate her, only Reyes did that, it should be about their vicious assault on Ms. Meili and the people they assaulted and robbed before her. What sickening is the beautification of a bunch of violent thugs, a media that is now painting them as some kind of Jesus figures because all they did was “beat a woman nearly to death”, instead of raping her. For people like you this is all accusing others of being racists, it’s the only way you can feel validated, what happened to Trisha Meili becomes unimportant in your minds, because phony victimization of black men is more important to you.

        • Tom Mininger says:

          True, there is no touch DNA available to analyze in the CP5 case. The spermatozoa DNA nails Reyes.

          At trial, the prosecutors also presented forensic evidence in addition to the “confessions”. A forensic analyst testified that a hair found on the victim was “similar” to Richardson’s hair “ to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty.” And there was hair found on Richardson. Also presented as evidence was a rock found near the scene of the crime that had blood and hair on it; evidence that was believed to have come from the victim.

          Mitochondrial DNA testing was eventually done on the hairs found on Richardson and revealed that the hairs were not related to the victim or the crime. Further testing on hairs found on the victim also matched Reyes. Neither blood nor the hair found on the rock matched the victim.

          Trisha Meili is an inspiration. I think we at least agree on that.
          http://www.centralparkjogger.com/

        • Tom Mininger says:

          I invite readers to watch “Ken Burns: The Central Park Five”. When you watch the progression of the interrogation process, with police creating an alternate reality of Park events which they believe themselves, and listen to Saul Kassin explain the process, bear in mind that this is not a one off.

          This is the catastrophe of the Reid interrogation method which plays out repeatedly in police stations around the world. This is what Amanda means by “Instead of calling it a false confession, they should be called a false admission,” said Knox. “It’s all authored by them (police).”

          There are better interview techniques being developed which do a better job of ensnaring only the guilty, but Reid is entrenched and progress is slow.

          https://www.amazon.com/Ken-Burns-Central-Park-Five/dp/B00BYEYPSE/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1498300897&sr=1-1&keywords=ken+burns+central+park+5

  7. William says:

    Your belated ‘thank you’ to Trump sounded petulant like a child stamping her feet in defiance. The tone of the article was defensive, hostile and immature, and the content shallow. The LA Times (AKA, LA Mind Crimes) used you to take a poke at Trump.

    Trump asked not for loyalty but gratitude. He didn’t expect an ingrate and a hypocrite.

    I do understand your dilemma caught as you are between Trump and the cabal of wealthy Democrat influencers in Seattle who supported the propaganda campaign in the American media and against the Italian courts. Trump had to go. If you didn’t pitch him over, your biggest support group would have abandoned you. You must dance their jig. It was they who sprung you from prison and they, through the Democrat machine in DC, who told the Dagos to fuck-off, their girl wasn’t coming back. The Italian Supreme Court figured why fight a losing battle with a super-power and annulled your case. They got rid of a national problem.

    You are selling a bill of goods by claiming harsh and long hours of interrogation, which led to your ‘false’ confession. The court records show otherwise. From what I saw at a distance, the Italian police and courts were quite professional.

    The Central Park Five were guilty and justly convicted. Trump was correct on this as were the courts and the police. The poor white woman, the victim, whose life these Negroes and ‘Latins’ ruined for sport no one talks about or remembers.

    “Muggers and murderers,” he [Trump] wrote, “should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes.” Bravo!!! Is Trump really from Texas? Texas is always up for a good execution.

    Jonathan Haidt? Who’s that faggot? Oh…a New York Jew.

    In your article you mentioned Trump’s polices as dangerous. You never give details as to why and I’ve read most of your postings on the subject. The Clinton’s are the real criminals. Bill was (is) a cocaine head who abused, raped, and used a number of women including many black prostitutes he picked up in his governor’s limo for quick BJs. Hillary covered for him by threatening and browbeating these women into silence. Hillary took bribes while in office for favors to foreign governments and other entities and funneled that money to the Clinton Crime Family Foundation. In addition, both Clintons have committed murder, espionage, and treason. They go unpunished. There’s your banana republic. There’s your misogyny.

    You said your father broke a pattern and didn’t vote Republican. That’s his choice, who cares.

    It was a tragedy with Meredith dead and you locked away for life since that meant two families never formed and several kids never born. Meredith was the baby of the family and no doubt her parents and the older kids spoiled her and doted on her. She was their little one. It’s difficult to imagine that you ended the sparkle in those pretty brown eyes that were Meredith’s. Two courts said you did. Only killer Rudy served significant time.

    In spite of all this, the court has ruled and you are free. I wish you well and hope the best for you as you find your path to travel. Don’t let bitterness eat away at you. The title of Wife and Mother is not a dishonor. That’s your decision but the way I see it, you owe the world a life. Get busy.

    BTW, France decided national suicide is their best approach to the future and thus defeated Le Pen. A little Bonaparte’s Retreat is fitting for the French requiem.

    Good-bye France.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZw7DpKs910

    I see where the bugger-boy mayor of Seattle quit the race. He said it was too hurtful for him and his HUSBAND to continue. This sick bastard belongs in a mental ward. He made the announcement from a bathhouse, how appropriate. What a sick place is Seattle.

    I’ve heard that you are looking for persons to interview concerning religious brainwashing in prison. You should contact Charles “Tex” Watson currently at the following location:

    Mule Creek State Prison, Ione, California.

    He’d be really glad to talk to you on religious matters in prison. Go visit him. His website:

    http://www.aboundinglove.org/main/

    • Tom Zupancic says:

      Amanda, the comment here has to be a contender for the most obnoxious, juvenile, ignorant and abusive things I have ever seen submitted your blog… (Okay, I’m sure you could disagree).

      Fascinating? Disturbing? Baffling? … Enlightening?

      Is this truly the world we live in? It would appear so. It’s sad.

    • jerry says:

      OK William, I actually agree with some of what you wrote but you repeated a guilter lie/misconception that is passed around the internet like it’s an established fact, when in truth, it is not. Amanda never confessed. Don’t cite the written statement to the police, guilters invariably reference it but nowhere in it did she confess. If you have a source for this “confession” then send it. You won’t though, because it doesn’t exist.

      That being said I somewhat agree about Trump, though not for the same reasons you might. My questions to Amanda is: Why do you worship Hillary and Obama? Did you know that Hillary as Sec. of State and under the direction of Obama cut the orders to bomb the hell out of Libya, destroyed the infrastructure of the country and caused the deaths of untold numbers of people? They ignited a human crisis that is still ongoing today. Then they rationalize it by mass importing conflict refugees from Libya as if promoting “diversity” actually justifies mass murder. Then how outraged were you at Trump’s far less destructive airstrike in Syria?

      Also, has Barack Obama ever publicly supported Amanda? I don’t recall reading anything about it so I don’t know where he stands on her case. However, perhaps there is a clue in the stance he took in the George Zimmerman / Treyvon Martin case. When he made a public statement he didn’t cite the evidence and tell people to withhold judgement until all details were out. He said: “Treyvon looks like one of his kids would look”
      I think that tells us where he might stand on the Amanda Knox case, after all, Rudy Guede looks more like one of his own kids than Amanda or Rafaelli would.

      When it boils down to the essence it appears that Barack sees one color…his own. Is that a man to admire? BTW, this is not about admiring Trump, I don’t admire him at all, he an arrogant and pompous egotist that I can barely stomach. However, there aren’t any Presidents and few politicians that I wouldn’t say the same about.

  8. Luara says:

    What a concept, that a person could be bought and owned with a tweet.
    Even robots cost a lot more than that.

  9. Stephane G says:

    I couldn’t agree more with these views you already expressed this past November. You may owe gratitude to your numerous supporters – and Trump was only one of them – but you certainly don’t owe allegiance to anyone and are definitely free to stand for the prevalence of reason and for what you think is right.

  10. Brian says:

    Seems to me there is a fine line between being grateful and “owing” someone something. Of course you should be grateful for his support, vocal and financial, at a time when you and your family needed all the help you could get.

    That gratitude doesn’t mean that you have to agree with everything he says or does. You certainly have the full right to your political and social beliefs, and to vote as your conscience dictates.

    But in all fairness, it does seem to me that it would have been gracious of you to NOT go out of your way to express yourself publicly on this one matter. In my opinion, if someone asked you how you felt about Mr. Trump’s policies, an appropriate answer might have been along these lines: “Mr. Trump helped me and my family when we needed it. While I may not agree with him on a lot of issues, I am and always will be thankful for that help.”

    • Luara says:

      How about loyalty to American democracy and liberal values? They are endangered.

    • Tom Zupancic says:

      Brian,

      Interesting comment. Just a couple of thoughts…

      Is there a fine line between being grateful and “Owing” someone something? In this case, in general, I would say no. In this case in particular, I would reiterate, no.

      ‘Thank you’ ought to suffice.

      Regarding being gracious, hmm… Should an objective observer ask ‘what would Trump do?’… never mind…

      Here is where I think this discussion goes off the rails. It is not about Trump. He is irrelevant. It is about Injustice. It is about what injustice does to real innocent people.

      How should the victims of such injustice behave? By NOT expressing themselves publically? Really? I don’t think so.

    • Paul Carr says:

      Brian, congratulations, you are now a member of the AK dutch uncle club. You seem to understand where I’m coming from. I’m the blogger who said she should be “nice” to Trump, just on the outside chance that his action was in earnest. Trump never mentioned his donation. AK leaked it unintentionally in one of her articles. We must assume that he had honorable intentions, and if so, the guy has more class than I thought.

      Don’t get me started on HRC. AK’s dad could never pay-for-play at her prices. She never lifted a finger and never will.

      Well at least I got a cool thank you out of AK. Nobodies like you and me have taken heat, slander and hell in her defense over the past ten years; but that doesn’t seem to concern her. After all she did broadcast her gratitude over network television after her release on 3 Oct 2011 and that should be enough for us all.

      I don’t understand why she must take such a hard line on a sacred cow; of all things abortion. Like all life-and-death issues, it’s case-by-case and so Roe V Wade will never be resolved. Regarding the Central Park Five, New York City police have their own opinion, strong enough to turn their backs on the mayor. I hope she’s well informed over these cases. Otherwise, all she is doing is alienating the vast silent majority in between. How does that help her crusade against unjust convictions?

      Has the crucible made her wise or only bitter? Does she have the depth, savvy or street smarts that goes with fame and influence? Can she temper anger with compromise and ambivalence? Can she speak for 330 million Americans? I always thought that “No man [or woman] is sufficient unto himself.” – Lucius Annaeus Seneca 4 BC to 65 AD. I’m glad she is now completely rehabilitated, self contained, and doesn’t need anybody.

    • just a parent says:

      Brian:

      Respectfully, I disagree.

      This matter reminds me of a story. Robert Caro in probably the first volume of his life’s work biography of Lyndon Johnson recites an instructive episode from Johnson’s first campaign for congress. To a young aide named John Connally (later governor of Texas) he commanded `go spread the smear that my opponent practices bestiality.’ ‘But how shall I prove it?’ replied Connally, `it’s not true.’ “Don’t worry about proving it,” said Johnson, “just get him to deny it.” And so it is here, in a fashion. Amanda’s reply to the president’s reported complaint is thoughtful and mature and persuasive and gracefully written, but the mere fact she make the effort was a concession to which Mr. Trump is not entitled.

      I deeply hope Amanda will refuse to ever again respond in any way to Donald Trump’s or his followers’ petulance toward her and instead will write and speak as she damn well pleases without the slightest regard for the fact that she can scarcely utter a thought without offending some opinion of someone somewhere among the sizable number of us whose words or money or publicity helped her fight off those who sought to destroy her. It is ample satisfaction for the adults among us that she get her life, and that she not be obliged to live it any less freely or fully on account of her ordeal.

      • Paul Carr says:

        Until recently AK advertised right here on this very website for donations to her defense fund, and now she arrogantly thumbs her nose at those who supported her.

        I wonder if AK ever read one of Donald Trump’s books? For an athletic woman, she seems ignorant about the Wollman Ice Skating Rink in Central Park Manhattan. Trump wrestled New York City’s muddleheaded political machine to make it possible. Today, there’s a beautiful pond surrounded by a city skyline where you can skate for only a few dollars.

        Fine AK, have it your way. Bellyache. Be an ingrate. I’ve defended your right to do so. As for me, I’m not sorry for helping you. Your battle was much bigger than some Pollyanna from a Seattle suburb. I don’t know if good can come from bad, but it takes a tough guy to overcome impossible odds.

        “All the King’s Men” 1949, Columbia, starring Broderick Crawford.

        • Tom Zupancic says:

          Paul Carr,

          Setting that amazing ice rink aside, (I actually prefer the work of the Gates Foundation when it comes to philanthropy, actually). I simply don’t get your argument.

          Amanda was the innocent victim of a brutal unjust assault by self-serving individuals out to promote themselves. She was defended by many people who did a lot to help her. She does not owe Donald Trump (a minor player) anything.

          • Tom Zupancic says:

            “Now there are 29 skaters on Wolmann rink
            Circling in singles and in pairs
            In this vigorous anonymity
            A blank face at the window stares and stares and stares and stares
            And the power of reason
            And the flowers of deep feeling
            Seem to serve me
            Only to deceive me”

          • Paul Carr says:

            No reflection on the Gates Foundation, but it’s irrelevant.

            The ice skating rink was not a charity but a project initiated by the City of New York Parks Department. The city had been throwing millions into it for years and getting nowhere. Trump bid on it and completed the project under budget and ahead of schedule. Trump graciously used the city’s leftover money to renovate the restaurant. Read “The Art of the Deal”.

            No, she doesn’t owe him a damn thing, and he understands that. He hasn’t breathed a word about his disappointment to anyone. Again, the guy has more class than I thought.

  11. Camille says:

    Hi Amanda,

    I love this op-ed you’ve penned for the LA Times.

    Even though I’m writing from Australia, your courageous story and strength is one that has certainly resonated far and wide.

    With that said, I was hoping you might be interested in joining us as a international speaker for a women’s talk event we’re planning to hold in Sydney, later this year.

    The event will be a storytelling forum designed to challenge, entertain and inspire women from all walks of life.

    Would this be something you might be interested in finding out more about? If so, I’d love to email you directly with more information.

    To provide you with a bit of background, we also produce the Women of Influence Awards which has been running for five years and was launched by Australia’s first female Prime Minister, Julia Gillard:
    http://www.afr.com/leadership/the-women-who-are-changing-australia-for-the-better-20131009-j8ggo

    Warmest,
    Camille
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/camillealarcon/
    https://twitter.com/CamAlarcon

  12. Tom Zupancic says:

    First off, Great Op Ed post Amanda. You most effectively address a key issue; the relevance of the concept of ‘Loyalty’.

    So, what is loyalty anyway… blind faith? reasoned commitment? an ideological absolute? a personal value? all of the above/none of the above? Now it seems kind of complicated. Kind of like ‘loyalty’ means different things to different people depending on… something.

    But wait. You made it perfectly clear up front regarding Donald Trump’s historical support for you: “Do I owe him my loyalty?” (Why?) After all, it was kind of a ‘no duh’. (Who was going to jump up and support a tragic miscarriage of justice?). All sorts of people supported you.

    “Thanks everybody” would appear to suffice. In simple terms, Trump was nothing special here and did nothing that many others did not far surpass.

    So whatever it may be, loyalty is irrelevant here. Generic gratitude to those who recognized injustice and spoke up on your behalf clearly suffices.

    Given that you have now formally stated, “Thank you, Mr. President”, I agree; done. (Well done, I would add).

  13. Tom Mininger says:

    I like a comment Michael Morton wrote about this article of yours:

    “I’m an exoneree, too, (about 25 years in the Texas prison system) and I’ve encountered similar outrage, when I do not fall in line with every cause and political belief of those who fought to free me.

    Here’s my usual response: if I had been trapped in a burning car and some skinheads happened by and freed me, would anyone expect me to become a skinhead?

    I’ve met Ms. Knox a time or two at various exoneree gatherings. Cut her a little slack. And allow her to be politically independent, as you would anyone else.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *