With all due respect to her, she isn't allowed to censor art just because of her personal grief. The story was a huge one that has endured 25+ years after it happened.
It's a short film that I wouldn't have heard about without her protests about it - so I don't really understand the implication that the director is set to profit off of a tragedy. Even if it wins an Oscar, can anyone else name a winner of the Short film category...ever? Besides, if she's so against the idea of people profiting off of her son's death then:
Quote:
|
Mrs Fergus has been a vocal campaigner over the years, pressing for longer sentences her son's murderers, who were sentenced to a minimum of eight years, and publishing her recent book, I Let Him Go.
|
Glass houses.
I can totally see why she's upset, though, and would possibly be of the same mindset had it happened to me, but I just don't think you can censor something of public interest just because of your personal attachment to it.