Amanda Knox Analysis

747 Words3 Pages

The Amanda Knox documentary discusses the murder of Meredith Kercher, a study-abroad student, in Perugia, Italy, and how her roommate - Amanda Knox - and her then boyfriend were falsely convicted. The documentary misleads viewers and has a subjective viewpoint. Its producers did not go into much detail of the problem and failed to create it from a neutral viewpoint. The documentary should focus more on Meredith’s and Amanda’s relationship, and put more emphasis on key people from the case such as Rudy Guede who was the only one that was convicted. The documentary manipulates and influences its viewers through relying on opinions rather than the facts of the case to present its point, and uses persuasive techniques such as certain music, word …show more content…

The narrative neglected to clarify why Amanda and her beau Rafael were discovered blameworthy twice. They didn 't list the reasons that drove the court to trust that Amanda and Rafael were without a doubt the ones who directed the wrongdoing. The principal purpose behind their conviction was that they discovered hints of DNA on a knife that had a trace of Meredith 's DNA. The creators ought to have utilized more police records and authority notes and discoveries while making the documentary. The Italian police bugged Amanda 's telephone and Rafael 's telephone. Including what they found from bugging their telephone would be intriguing since it would uncover more about the case and help the watcher have a superior picture of the two. The narrative neglected to clarify why and what persuaded the Italian authorities that three individuals had carried out the wrongdoing. The main individual that was convicted was Rudy Guede. Adding information such as, if Meredith, Rafael, and Amanda had any past interactions on the telephone or some other way. Other facts the creators could have included would have been looking at transactions made by the suspects to see if any unusual activity had occurred.
The Amanda Knox case was a peculiar case that took many startling turns. For this reason, the documentary did not inform the viewers with facts and proofs instead it used opinions. There’s no denying that from the start of the documentary the creators take you through a well-constructed path of emotions and opinions they want you to feel. The creators use creative manipulative techniques to influence us into having an uninformed judgment. Subsequently, the documentary did not provide insightful information to the

Open Document