Talk:Killing of Damilola Taylor

Tag

Added current event tag for trial proceedings yet to be concluded. --Benwilson528 00:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Murder or manslaughter?

Ok One thing I checked the references, and the first two are nonsense. There is absolutely no article stating that these kids made that court room outburst. In fact the first and second refs lead to articles about Iraq!!!! These are kids on trial. this article is very indecent. Im going to clean up the worst of it. Someone has to!

"who was murdered in the UK". Should this not say *allegedly* murdered? All we know for sure is that he died. JLP

- Yes definately should say allegedly as there are two points of view. IH

No, I think he was definately murdered and there is evidence to prove this. --Segafreak2 13:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Following the outcome of the retrial, I've changed this back to murdered. Jenny Wong 16:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The retrial gave manslaughter convictions, so murdered might not be accurate. How about "killed"?--Mongreilf 16:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, the new wording works for me. Jenny Wong

Just as a point of information, "murder" implies some kind of plan or intent to kill somebody. "Manslaughter" is when death occurs without such prior planning. There is perhaps a grey area in law where a wound has been inflicted "by manslaughter", where the person or persons that have caused the wound realise that it is likely to be fatal, and take no action to call emergency services. In this case, they maybe, under certain circumstances, be charged with murder.

Take care when discussing court cases that are in progress - anything that implies the guilt or innocence of the accused is contempt of court. In extreme cases, this can lead to a judge ordering a retrial. Ericatom 19:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Whilst what Ericatom says is very important, in this case both the accused have been found guilty, although they have not yet been sentenced. In these circumstances, there is more room for discussion, although it would still be unwise to argue what sentence should be given.

Update

The article speaks of October 2006 as being in the future. AnonMoos 21:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

2 brothers?

Who are the two original brothers not named for legal reasons? Presumably they are now known and are the Preddies. The article should state that rather than mention of the Preddies suddenly appearing from nowhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 221.133.86.254 (talk) 05:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC). I agree with the above unsigned comment Hannahcronin (talk) 10:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite

This article is very badly written, both grammatically and structurally.

The construction of the "Early Life" section is almost laughable, and reads like it was taken from a biographical piece of writing.

The whole thing desperately needs rewriting. Thisnamestaken (talk) 23:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

NPOV? May need cleanup

I am very tempted to add {{npov}}. There is a suspicion that the overall point of view from this article may not be neutral. There is also too few independant sources to verify vital facts. The article could do with a re-write as well, I'm afraid.

88.105.87.149 (talk) 11:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)