Home » International Cases » Infamy At Work: The Attack On Funding

Infamy At Work: The Attack On Funding

rightsMore than a year ago, before the Florence appeal trial concerning the murder of Meredith Kercher, Raffaele Sollecito, defendant in that trial together with Amanda Knox, set up an account on the crowdfunding site GoFundMe to collect money to pay for his defense expenses during the oncoming trial and beyond.

He has in this way received the contributions of his supporters from all around the world until a few weeks ago, when his account was suddenly closed by GoFundMe and Sollecito had to find a new crowdfunding site to collect the money his supporters have freely decide to provide him with.

Apparently he experienced some problem in so doing, since new accounts were opened and shortly after closed on this or that crowdfunding site.

While for what concerns GoFundMe it seems that there has recently been a change of policy by the site itself which has impacted other users of GoFundMe, as detailed by Rick Cohen on NoProfitQuarterly, it must also be said that on a site notorious for advocating against Knox and Sollecito, there was not just rejoicing, but also a claim of responsibility for what had happened to Sollecito’s account on GoFundMe and the assertion that similar actions were under way also with other funding sites (like Paypal) to prevent both Knox and Sollecito from collecting funds from their supporters.

While GoFundMe’s decision can be the outcome of costs/benefits considerations (and the aforementioned article hints to some evidence that the probability of a given account being closed is inversely proportional to the amount of money passing through it), nevertheless the fact that people notorious for campaigning for the conviction of a defendant are now also actively acting to prevent that same defendant from collecting money necessary to his defense is something that should alert all those who have a cause of any kind at heart.

What says if a cause is right or wrong? Who decides if it is correct to support or to help financially an individual or a group of people?

The first sure answer is: certainly not those who oppose that cause or despise those people.

The second answer is that it should be left to each of us individually, as free citizens, to decide if we want or not to support this or that cause, this or that individual or group of people.

As one could deduce from the saying “putting one’s money where one’s mouth is”, providing funds to a cause is tantamount to speak in favor of that cause, and hence trying to prevent such funding is tantamount to prevent free speech.

As such, any attempt to preventing the funding of defendants in any trial to collect funds for their defense (but the same can be said of any crowdfunding) is an attack on the constitutional rights not of the defendants, but of every citizen willing to contribute, since it constitutes an attack to their ability to express their free will.

While having such an attack sanctioned by a Court would require a lawsuit against shadowy characters which could cost to cash stripped defendants more money than what they may receive from said crowdfunding, those who want to contribute to any cause of their choice and who risk to be prevented from doing so by shameful lobbying, can still do something.

They can vent off their outrage directly to sites like GoFundMe or Paypal, forcing them to reconsider their policies or preventing them from yielding to the pressures of those who would want them to shut down the accounts they don’t like, they can write to important organizations like ACLU and the Innocence Project, raising a red flag concerning this threat to both the rights of free people to advocate for a cause and the rights of defendants to assure themselves a defense.

This is a threat going well beyond the context of a specific murder case: it is certainly a threat to anyone working against any wrongful conviction, but it is also a potential threat to any advocate of whatever cause.

Today it is Knox and Sollecito, who or what will it be tomorrow?



  1. Julie Kaye Jorgensen

    This is an excellent article and you bring up some very valid points that we all should carefully consider.

    • No, I work with computers. Never sold an insurance policy in my whole life.
      And by the way, I’m clueless about nothing.

      • I have just named the ECHR a couple of times probably, but people like you are more interested in attacking and offending for the sake of it. I have always wondered how many of those words all of you would dare to repeat face to face. It would be an interesting experience.

      • Stop talking nonsense, again, Luca…You, like your Italiano mucker, Frank Sforzo, managed to fool the Americans. The rest of us were not so easily led. You know it, Amanda knows it, the Sollecitos most definitely know it. You have a few months at the most to carry on ripping off the gullible—hi Karen.

        “I’m clueless about nothing.”

        You convinced the easily led, like carlofab, purposely then rote?

        The gravy train has gone Luca, you failed.

        Turn out the lights on your way out.

  2. Our rights are being taken by an ORGANIZED group of haters, Freedom of Speech’s ugly underbelly.

    • Steven and Dorkus Vile, seriously. I am the LAST person you can accuse of that and ALL of my work and commentary proves my point. You are making wild and untrue accusations to simply to try and hurt me. Now run back to blather with your little stalker pals or actually come up with proof of what you say. Do you even realize that you are barking the party line with absolutely nothing to back it up? You come off looking like complete dorks. Just because some fringe commenter made a disparaging remark does not mean you can blanket all innocence supporters with this idiocy. How ridiculous!

      btw, Readers…I call him a ‘stalker’ because only the people who frequent the various hate sites connected to this case know anything personal about me. Obviously these two nutters and all of their little pals have read the dossier that has been judiciously gleaned from the internet by the very people who claim to support Meredith, but spend all damn day badgering me, my associates and making up perverted crap about innocent people.

      Not a single one of them has the balls to use a real identity, they are the epitome of a Troll, as well as being bonafied stalkers.

      And these STALKER TROLLS are the only ones who comment about personal information, therefore they have read and/or discussed said dossier on said hate sites or are in contact with said haters.

      What does that say about them?

      They think they can hurt me with such stupid remarks. I’m beginning to suspect that they don’t have a whole brain amongst them because they haven’t figured out that I just don’t care what these idjits say. Sheesh!

      It’s the Italians who have a lot to answer for and if these goofballs really cared about Meredith Kercher and getting justice for her–they would have trained their sights on what the Perugians did years and years ago.

      That they have not speaks volumes.

      And Oh guess what? Amanda and all of her family respect and appreciate
      my work. I can only hope that one day the Kerchers will as well, it was
      all done to help them too.

      • Screen shots of your words were made Pruett. All this bluff and bluster about trying to hurt you is nonsense. If you’re own words hurt you, or you’re ashamed of them, then think in future woman.

        I personally know friends of Amanda Knox, I can assure you they do not appreciate “your work” Karen, you’re burnt out, you’re hurting the cause. Regardless of the nonsense Nigel feeds you, it isn’t like that in Seattle Karen.

    • btw, let’s set the record straight. I did not accuse the Kercher’s of running a PR campaign. I accused PEOPLE LIKE YOU of running a PR campaign on behalf of the Kerchers. With or without their blessing.

      AND I pointed out that amongst the three families caught up in this mess that the Kerchers are handling it the best precisely because they are historically members of the British media and know what to do. Unlike teachers, accountants and doctors.

      That observation is about as true as it gets regarding the Kerchers and there is nothing wrong with it. In fact, it would make a great deal of sense for them to handle themselves in this manner, as they own the know-how. Unlike the Knox and Sollecito families.

      And your Nazi comment is also out of context, that was made in reference to you and your little pals, because you ARE running a classic propaganda campaign like the Nazi’s did.

      Again, separate from what the Kerchers are doing.

      The very fact that you have cherry-picked and mashed my commentary together to smear me simply underscores what I have implied.

      • Please let me quote you Pruett:

        “The Kercher PR Machine in all its bloody glory”

        It took the words of your leader, Bruce Fischer, to reign you in & remind you of your place.

        I note a lot of the comments you make of late are apparently “out of context” Pruett. Please woman, at least stand by what you say, we would all respect you more. Just admit it, you hate the Kercher family as they know the truth.

        Please stop leaving yourself, your “group” and Amanda in he difficult position of having to explain yourself all the time. Just be brave, Karen. Say what you want to say about Meredith Kercher, and stand by your words.

  3. They prove once again that nothing & noone is off limits. For a group so confident in guilt, their desperation has hit an all time low.

  4. Oh yes, you and your precious little troll friends had nothing to do with that. Even though there was crowing aplenty on the Hate Sites. All manner of braggery going on in public view.

    According you, my dear Vile, all of the trolls are just innocent babes.

    “Innocent Babes” with years of proof on their very own websites showing how they have again and again and again banded together to contact one entity after another to push their agenda.

  5. corpus vile and Jim Laurel (Steven) are not welcome here. they have shown themselves to be childish trolls throughout the internet. They have both been blacklisted from this website.

  6. The Thin Blue Line

    Nice article. Whatever. OK, if you have not yet signed up for paypal, you can do so for free right here:


    You will have to verify your email address. Then you will have to put in a bank account number and then get a small free deposit from paypal. Then you have to verify that deposit amount. It will be small and you can keep it and then you are signed up and ready to go.

    After that go back to this url here:


    Click “email” and then when the email box comes up, select “Report Fraud/Prohibit Use”. As a subtopic select “Report prohibited items being sold using PayPal”.

    In the URL (web address) of the site selling the items (optional) put in amandaknox.com, then in the message box type in something like this:

    “Please ban the “Amanda Legal Defense Trust” from PayPal as it is supporting a convicted murderer named Amanda Marie Knox. Recently the GoFundMe.com site banned her co-defendant Raffaele Sollecito from its services so I think that Paypal should do the same for Amanda Knox. Thank you.”

    Or just copy and past the above and then send it. You have to do the email as quickly as possible because the system will automatically log you out if you take too long. Repeat the above on a daily basis if you can, but don’t overdo it. Once a day should be enough. Let’s really do this. Thank you again.

  7. The Thin Blue Line

    Thanks for writing in Luca Jellybeans. OK, contact PayPal to ban Amanda Knox from using its services. Many emails and phone numbers here:


    or sign up and complain here:


    Thank you.

  8. There seems to be some confusion with the author. The accused are convicted of murder and are appealing their sentences. Convicts don’t get to do many things. Like vote. Soliciting funds for appeal or vacations in the DR is not ok for convicts.

    • There is no confusion: I’m defending my right (as well as anybody else’s) to fund their defense, which is a fully legitimate endeavour. This may as well be said of collecting money to search for new evidence to exonerate already convicted people, including (perhaps especially, given my opinion on the Death Penalty) those who are in the Death Row.

      • If you were serious and not an assclown (I have seen you on other FOA boards and know you are the latter) you could contact their families and mail them a check. In this instance they are both lying to the public by claiming they are innocent and begging for money while flying to NY and DR making future fugitive plans.

    • ColinConnaughton

      Soliciting for funds is always ‘OK’. There have been many miscarriages of justice rectified only after many years campaigning and fundraising.

      • No that’s just not true. Killers cannot lie for money. Son of Sam laws!

        • ColinConnaughton

          Killers? lie? Neither of those have anything to do with Raffaele. You’re a troll or a guilter. I will ignore you henceforth.

          • What precisely are you talking about? Sollecito is a convicted killer. He killed his victim. He is going to jail for a long time. He has no right to lie to the public for money. Gofundme did the right thing. Others will follow.

Leave a Reply