Talk:Michele Dauber

Twitter Comments and Reaction

Recently Dr. Dauber posted some comments about women in law and the Johnny Depp / Amber Heard lawsuit. I suspect activists have been warring on the talk page about it, with comments and erasures. Instead of the usual edit warring, I'd like to see if editors will permit any mention of this topic in the article.

Both Newsweek [1] and Fox News [2] have covered this. Dauber's comments [3] are readily verifiable and both Newsweek and Fox are reliable sources so BLP violations are not assumed.

So, before I add elements of Dr. Dauber's commentary on women in law who represent unpopular defendants, I'd like input to see if this is even possible in the the current wikipedia culture. Mattnad (talk) 12:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

I believe the Twitter comments and particularly Dauber's comments apparently threatening a Stanford student she would use her position in Silicon Valley politics to damage his career if her angered her, really ought to be in her bio.

I believe her previous controversial Tweets should be included as well — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:1CD0:1710:3156:C541:BB19:3B53 (talk) 00:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Cancer diagnosis

Why keep removing the part about her having cancer? She has posted about it multiple times on her public Twitter (which it is reasonable to assume she is the only person who has access to). I know that Twitter isn't always considered a reliable source but I feel like someone reporting on their personal twitter that they have cancer is more than enough confirmation. I also know that this page is monitored by people close to her who remove anything that she wouldn't want on here but she has tweeted about her cancer multiple times so clearly she wants that out there. 98.176.148.115 (talk) 07:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Talk Section has had discussions of many verifiable issues removed by someone

I think it is not very controversial that Dauber ran the campaign to recall the judge in the Brock Turner trial

Soon after the sentence, Professor Dauber gave an interview with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now, in which she said Chanel Miller was "gravely injured" when the EMT's arrived on the scene "Gravely injured" is a term of art in medicine meaning your injuries have a good chance of killing you. If I hit you in the head with a club, knocking you out, and knocking some teeth out, causing a concussion, and then break both your legs - you are not "gravely injured" because your life was never in danger - I think this should be in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:1CD0:1710:3156:C541:BB19:3B53 (talk) 00:49, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Won't happen. The only people who edit this page, Chanel Miller's page or the People v. Turner page are people close to Dauber and Miller. They have been working overtime to control the narrative for years now. 98.176.148.115 (talk) 10:11, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

There should be a mention that a 2022 study found that the recall of Persky subsequently led California judges to give more punitive sentencing. This is a terrible and significant consequence and is material to this biography. And I DON'T care about the family connections that may or may not be editing this page! I am VERY upset to learn this! In fact, how dare you treat this as your personal property if you're reading this. Wikipedia is a community resource, so if what the above poster is saying is true, a big Georgia ta hell with y'all to ya! And if it ain't, then shame on them and I'll leave ya be. Source: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/718357 Lothar76 (talk) 22:32, 26 July 2022 (UTC)