This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I'm adding to this article for a class assignment for Women and Crime. I had to add a theoretical explanation. Chrisguapo27 ( talk) 00:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)chrisguapo27 chrisguapo27 Chrisguapo27 ( talk) 00:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of Dr. Patrick Barnes, a key witness against Woodward, having changed his mind in light of a "revolution" in the understanding of head injuries since the trial? http://www.npr.org/2011/06/28/137454415/the-child-cases-guilty-until-proven-innocent?ft=1&f=1001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.218.82.48 ( talk) 20:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Done. This is important evidence in determining Woodward’s guilt or innocence. I also have considerable doubt about baby-sitter Trenda Kemmerer’s conviction in the death of 10-month-old Christina Dew - a very similar case: in 2001, she was sentenced to 55 years, but it could equally have been the baby’s mother who was responsible. TheTruth-2009 ( talk) 13:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to overhaul this article later today. I'm not expecting anyone to be making any major edits (or really viewing this page so much), but it'll be an easy fix.
Hjfreyer 10:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
This case also highlighted the institutional racism of the American judicial system and the supporters of Woodward, namely the British media. When a white girl from the UK murders a brown baby the likes of the Daily Mirror mounted a huge campaign to have Woodward freed, even though they had no idea if she was innocent or not. However when Manjit Basuta, a brown brit who was accused of murdering a white baby no such media frenzy was visible. And the US justice system sent her down for life. - Equality? - Don't make me laugh 81.179.244.250 18:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)P http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_412000/412542.stm
The above post is misleading. Unlike LW, Ms Basuta was a professional 43 year old childcarer. She was convicted largely because of eyewitness evidence by a (non-caucasion) employee. There was in fact a considerable effort on her behalf which did lead to an order for a retrial and to her being released in December 2003.
The Louise Woodward entry is also wrong to say that the US Supreme Court rejected the prosecution’s appeal against the reduction of the conviction from second-degree murder to involuntary manslaughter. That appeal was rejected unanimously. It was the prosecution’s appeal against the 279-day sentence which was rejected 4-3.
I think you mean the Massachusetts Supreme Court, not the US Supreme Court. Cbreitel 03:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I also believe that the article should include facts related to the racial bias, if not blatant racism, of some especially in the UK. There were statements that implied or even claimed that the Asian-Indian parents murdered their child; the White girl could not have, etc.
DrLeonP ( talk) 06:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
At the moment this article (falsely) assumes that all readers will know what this phrase means in US English. Could a native speaker of American English please clarify it?
'Pop the baby on the bed' is UK English, surely? Certainly I;ve been using the phrase (and similar) all my life StuartDouglas 11:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
The verb "to pop" in British English implies "to place" - as in, "I popped the baby on the bed" approximately equals "I placed the baby on the bed". There is no connotation of violent action in British English as there is in American English. I am Canadian and have lived in Britain for two years, and have used "to pop" in the nonviolent sense of the word many times. Perhaps the prosecution or defense counsel in this case should have hired a linguistics expert conversant in both American and British English to explain the difference in meanings.
"There were old wrist injuries to the infant that may have been incurred before Woodward even arrived at the house. Woodward, however, admitted under cross-examination that she never noticed any slight bumps, marks or any unusual behavior by the baby at any time prior to the night he was taken to hospital."
The first sentence in the above quote has weasel words ("may have been incurred"....need citation?) in it. The whole paragraph needs proper citation, especially the second sentence. Can someone find verbatim testimony please? Sdsures ( talk) 16:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
She quit law studies to become a salsa dance teacher ?? That is so wierd...she is going to be making no money in salsa teaching, thatz for sure...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Raindreamer ( talk • contribs) 07:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I was in the US at the time she was first sentenced, and I heard that there was a strong and widespread reaction against it in the UK. I was curious to know whether that negative reaction was because there were doubts of her guilt, a feeling that the trial was unjust, a feeling that the sentence was too harsh, or some other issue entirely. I was hoping the article might have some information on this.
Muddle-headed Wombat 16:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
There was a fair bit of media inspired agitation, but for peopl ein general 'strong and widespread' would be pushing it. StuartDouglas 10:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I removed the category "English murderers" because the conviction that stands is of involuntary manslaughter. DeSales 23:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
The removal of this category is not supported by the colloquial definition of "murder" provided by the dictionary, or the legal definition of murder provided by Massachusetts law. Cbreitel 04:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I am an attorney and see no basis for any libel claim. The category description of "English murderers" refers to "murderer" in the common English, dictionary sense. The dictionary definition of murder refers to the unlawful killing of a human being, which is consistent with the reduced conviction of manslaughter. Cbreitel 00:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the point of the above comment is. To begin with she IS a convicted criminal and there is no debate on that question. Second, neither US nor British law societies have a per se prohibition on "criminals" becoming attorneys or solicitors, which explains why she was permitted to practice law in the UK. To say that "in England she is not even a criminal" is a meaningless statement without context. To the British public who worships her as a hero, she is very obviously not a criminal. To the British court system which has entered a civil judgment against her based on the US conviction, however, she has in fact been adjudged a criminal. To any British government entity that gives her papers to fill out where she must disclose whether she has ever been convicted of a crime, she is obligated to mark "Yes". Cbreitel 18:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
What does "she received a degree, class 2:2" exactly does "class 2:2" mean?
PainMan ( talk) 20:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Effectively it means she did poorly, particuarly given the fact that the university she attended is not a very good one. -- Mllsskb2 ( talk) 10:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Removed the following sentence because it makes no sense:
The editor needs to repost the sentence.
Polygraph results ("lie detectors") are not admissible in US courts because of the device's inherent unreliability. Many, many people have fooled these machines--including a good friend of mine.
The most typical method is to put a tack in one's shoe and the step on it when answering the questions. The pain will cause the block the physiological reactions the machine is supposedly able to "detect" as a lie.
PainMan ( talk) 23:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed this sentence:
By putting quotation marks around the word character clearly indicates the editor's bias.
Also, something like clearly needs to be sourced.
PainMan ( talk) 23:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I am speaking from memory but wasn't there a further case where somebody had used funds raised for LW's defence for other purposes. The verdict was not guilty because the money had been contributed with "no strings attached" so could be used in any way. It left a very bad tatse though. 222.209.143.170 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC).
I'm not convinced that the following has any relevance to this article, as it has nothing to do with the case:
In particular I don't see why we have to name her ex-boyfriend. Can anyone who is familiar with WP:NOTABILITY, or WP:BLP, or WP:MOSLEGAL explain why this paragraph should or shouldn't be included? Lfh ( talk) 12:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I have added this fact to the article, as it is relevant to the question of Woodward’s guilt or innocence. It is much easier to believe that an ignorant teenager could fail to notice injuries to the baby, than that two medically qualified adults could miss them. TheTruth-2009 ( talk) 09:08, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I added the (newly created) category Category:Child abuse in the United Kingdom, which covers all child abuse articles which have connections to the United Kingdom. Editor TwoTwoHello then accused me in an edit summary of "How can you accuse someone of child abuse in the UK without a source". I'm not at all! I am just putting it into a category. The case made as many headlines here as in the United States, and started a wider political debate - hence its inclsuion. I have only started this debate to add back the category. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 19:48, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I'm adding to this article for a class assignment for Women and Crime. I had to add a theoretical explanation. Chrisguapo27 ( talk) 00:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)chrisguapo27 chrisguapo27 Chrisguapo27 ( talk) 00:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of Dr. Patrick Barnes, a key witness against Woodward, having changed his mind in light of a "revolution" in the understanding of head injuries since the trial? http://www.npr.org/2011/06/28/137454415/the-child-cases-guilty-until-proven-innocent?ft=1&f=1001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.218.82.48 ( talk) 20:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Done. This is important evidence in determining Woodward’s guilt or innocence. I also have considerable doubt about baby-sitter Trenda Kemmerer’s conviction in the death of 10-month-old Christina Dew - a very similar case: in 2001, she was sentenced to 55 years, but it could equally have been the baby’s mother who was responsible. TheTruth-2009 ( talk) 13:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to overhaul this article later today. I'm not expecting anyone to be making any major edits (or really viewing this page so much), but it'll be an easy fix.
Hjfreyer 10:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
This case also highlighted the institutional racism of the American judicial system and the supporters of Woodward, namely the British media. When a white girl from the UK murders a brown baby the likes of the Daily Mirror mounted a huge campaign to have Woodward freed, even though they had no idea if she was innocent or not. However when Manjit Basuta, a brown brit who was accused of murdering a white baby no such media frenzy was visible. And the US justice system sent her down for life. - Equality? - Don't make me laugh 81.179.244.250 18:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)P http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_412000/412542.stm
The above post is misleading. Unlike LW, Ms Basuta was a professional 43 year old childcarer. She was convicted largely because of eyewitness evidence by a (non-caucasion) employee. There was in fact a considerable effort on her behalf which did lead to an order for a retrial and to her being released in December 2003.
The Louise Woodward entry is also wrong to say that the US Supreme Court rejected the prosecution’s appeal against the reduction of the conviction from second-degree murder to involuntary manslaughter. That appeal was rejected unanimously. It was the prosecution’s appeal against the 279-day sentence which was rejected 4-3.
I think you mean the Massachusetts Supreme Court, not the US Supreme Court. Cbreitel 03:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I also believe that the article should include facts related to the racial bias, if not blatant racism, of some especially in the UK. There were statements that implied or even claimed that the Asian-Indian parents murdered their child; the White girl could not have, etc.
DrLeonP ( talk) 06:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
At the moment this article (falsely) assumes that all readers will know what this phrase means in US English. Could a native speaker of American English please clarify it?
'Pop the baby on the bed' is UK English, surely? Certainly I;ve been using the phrase (and similar) all my life StuartDouglas 11:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
The verb "to pop" in British English implies "to place" - as in, "I popped the baby on the bed" approximately equals "I placed the baby on the bed". There is no connotation of violent action in British English as there is in American English. I am Canadian and have lived in Britain for two years, and have used "to pop" in the nonviolent sense of the word many times. Perhaps the prosecution or defense counsel in this case should have hired a linguistics expert conversant in both American and British English to explain the difference in meanings.
"There were old wrist injuries to the infant that may have been incurred before Woodward even arrived at the house. Woodward, however, admitted under cross-examination that she never noticed any slight bumps, marks or any unusual behavior by the baby at any time prior to the night he was taken to hospital."
The first sentence in the above quote has weasel words ("may have been incurred"....need citation?) in it. The whole paragraph needs proper citation, especially the second sentence. Can someone find verbatim testimony please? Sdsures ( talk) 16:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
She quit law studies to become a salsa dance teacher ?? That is so wierd...she is going to be making no money in salsa teaching, thatz for sure...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Raindreamer ( talk • contribs) 07:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I was in the US at the time she was first sentenced, and I heard that there was a strong and widespread reaction against it in the UK. I was curious to know whether that negative reaction was because there were doubts of her guilt, a feeling that the trial was unjust, a feeling that the sentence was too harsh, or some other issue entirely. I was hoping the article might have some information on this.
Muddle-headed Wombat 16:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
There was a fair bit of media inspired agitation, but for peopl ein general 'strong and widespread' would be pushing it. StuartDouglas 10:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I removed the category "English murderers" because the conviction that stands is of involuntary manslaughter. DeSales 23:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
The removal of this category is not supported by the colloquial definition of "murder" provided by the dictionary, or the legal definition of murder provided by Massachusetts law. Cbreitel 04:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I am an attorney and see no basis for any libel claim. The category description of "English murderers" refers to "murderer" in the common English, dictionary sense. The dictionary definition of murder refers to the unlawful killing of a human being, which is consistent with the reduced conviction of manslaughter. Cbreitel 00:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the point of the above comment is. To begin with she IS a convicted criminal and there is no debate on that question. Second, neither US nor British law societies have a per se prohibition on "criminals" becoming attorneys or solicitors, which explains why she was permitted to practice law in the UK. To say that "in England she is not even a criminal" is a meaningless statement without context. To the British public who worships her as a hero, she is very obviously not a criminal. To the British court system which has entered a civil judgment against her based on the US conviction, however, she has in fact been adjudged a criminal. To any British government entity that gives her papers to fill out where she must disclose whether she has ever been convicted of a crime, she is obligated to mark "Yes". Cbreitel 18:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
What does "she received a degree, class 2:2" exactly does "class 2:2" mean?
PainMan ( talk) 20:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Effectively it means she did poorly, particuarly given the fact that the university she attended is not a very good one. -- Mllsskb2 ( talk) 10:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Removed the following sentence because it makes no sense:
The editor needs to repost the sentence.
Polygraph results ("lie detectors") are not admissible in US courts because of the device's inherent unreliability. Many, many people have fooled these machines--including a good friend of mine.
The most typical method is to put a tack in one's shoe and the step on it when answering the questions. The pain will cause the block the physiological reactions the machine is supposedly able to "detect" as a lie.
PainMan ( talk) 23:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed this sentence:
By putting quotation marks around the word character clearly indicates the editor's bias.
Also, something like clearly needs to be sourced.
PainMan ( talk) 23:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I am speaking from memory but wasn't there a further case where somebody had used funds raised for LW's defence for other purposes. The verdict was not guilty because the money had been contributed with "no strings attached" so could be used in any way. It left a very bad tatse though. 222.209.143.170 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC).
I'm not convinced that the following has any relevance to this article, as it has nothing to do with the case:
In particular I don't see why we have to name her ex-boyfriend. Can anyone who is familiar with WP:NOTABILITY, or WP:BLP, or WP:MOSLEGAL explain why this paragraph should or shouldn't be included? Lfh ( talk) 12:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I have added this fact to the article, as it is relevant to the question of Woodward’s guilt or innocence. It is much easier to believe that an ignorant teenager could fail to notice injuries to the baby, than that two medically qualified adults could miss them. TheTruth-2009 ( talk) 09:08, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I added the (newly created) category Category:Child abuse in the United Kingdom, which covers all child abuse articles which have connections to the United Kingdom. Editor TwoTwoHello then accused me in an edit summary of "How can you accuse someone of child abuse in the UK without a source". I'm not at all! I am just putting it into a category. The case made as many headlines here as in the United States, and started a wider political debate - hence its inclsuion. I have only started this debate to add back the category. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 19:48, 27 May 2014 (UTC)