Jump to content

Talk:Rick Alan Ross

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 173.72.57.223 (talk) at 00:00, 27 May 2015 (→‎Third paragraph redundant). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please use a more specific OTRS template. See the Template:OTRS or below for available templates. Template:OTRS could refer to one of several templates related to the OTRS system. Instead of using this template, use one of the more specific templates listed below.

Commonly-used OTRS templates

See also

{{Template disambiguation}} shouldn't be transcluded in the talk namespaces.

9 Request Criminal Record

Change -- "In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was convicted of the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and sentenced to probation.[1] The following year, he robbed a jewelry store in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime and received four years probation.[1][8]"

To --In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was convicted of the attempted burglary of a vacant model, which was plead down to trespassing and he received probation.[1] In 1975 he was convicted of second degree conspiracy to commit grand theft in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime, made full restitution and received four years probation.[1] Ross' probation was terminated early due to good conduct. In 1983 a Superior Court in Arizona ordered to vacate the Judgement of Guilt, dismiss charges and restore his civil rights.

This represents my complete criminal record (1974-1983) from beginning to end.

Sources as follows:

Ortega, Tony, (November 25, 1995) "Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlatons" Phoenix New Times, which reports, "pled down to trespassing" and also states, "but everything in Ross' possession was returned to the store."

See http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/hush-hush-sweet-charlatans-6426159

PDF of official signed original document of the Adult Probation Department Superior Court, which was terminated early due to good conduct January 18, 1979.

See 1979 PDF official document from the Adult Probation Department http://www.culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23617-rick-ross-termination-of-probation-.html

PDF of official signed document of the Superior Court of Arizona Maricopa Country Case No. 85433 June 7, 1983.

See http://culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23616-rick-ross-application-for-restoration-of-civil-rights-.html

See http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/index.asp This is the Judicial Branch of Arizona Maricopa County website. The records are on file there as proven by the PDF documents, but documents that old are not accessible online.

I have the original documents in my possession and am willing to have them inspected by a neutral party to be verified.

I have voted in Arizona since 1983 and was allowed security clearance to enter county, state and federal jail and prison facilities as an official to conduct programs and visit inmates as part of the Jewish Prisoner Program of Jewish Family and Children's Service of Phoenix. This would not have been possible without the previously cited court orders necessary for a security clearance.

Source -- "Ross to head religious committee for state corrections department," (March 12, 1986) Greater Phoenix Jewish News.

Source -- Norton, Ann M. (September 29, 1984) "Synagogue-state program now serves Jewish inmates" The Arizona Daily Star.

Source -- Stocker, Joseph (June 17, 1983)"Protective Custody or Christianity It's a tough choice for Arizona's inmates" Greater Phoenix Jewish News.

These three articles are not available online, other than through the archive at the Cult Education Institute. But they all report my entrance and activities officially within county, state and federal jails and prisons within Arizona.

Another Source online.

See http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/hush-hush-sweet-charlatans-6426159

Tony Ortega reports for the Phoenix New Times, "In 1985, Ross deprogrammed Joyce Lukezic, who was accused and later acquitted in the famous Redmond murder case. While awaiting her three trials, Lukezic had fallen into a radical Pentecostal jail ministry and given up Judaism."

The deprogramming of Joyce Lukezic would not have been possible if I did not have the security clearance to enter the jail she was held in.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, for reasons given above (#Early convictions, and other sections). --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The argument that you could not have entered the jail if you did not have security clearance violates one of our core policies, WP:OR, specifically the section called WP:SYN. The next time you are interviewed, you should ask the reporter verify that your probation was terminated early due to good conduct and that in 1983 a Superior Court in Arizona ordered to vacate the Judgement of Guilt, dismiss charges and restore your civil rights, and to include discussion of that. It is remarkable that no one has written about that yet. The bottom line is that until that appears in a reliable, independent source, we cannot discuss that here. That is how Wikipedia works - it is what keeps all kind of garbage out of the encyclopedia. Sometimes it is frustrating, I know, but this place would be a cesspool if it were not for WP:VERIFY, WP:OR, WP:NPOV, and WP:BLP. Think of all the crap that people who don't like you would try to add, based on the same kinds of reasoning. Jytdog (talk) 12:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The official documents confirm the facts. Court records don't require a confirmation through a media interview. No one in the mdia has asked me in years about my 1974-1983 criminal records. It's not relevant or of interest in the news interviews I do. The documents alone are proof positive. Tony Ortega reported (November 25, 1995) "Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlatons" Phoenix New Times, that the burglary charge was "pled down to trespassing" and also reported, "everything in Ross' possession was returned to the store."

Please change my bio to read as follows -- In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was convicted of the attempted burglary of a vacant model home, which was plead down to trespassing. He was sentenced to probation.[1] The following year, he robbed a jewelry store in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime, made full restitution and received four years probation.[1][8]

I read WP:OR, specifically and the section called WP:SYN. I didn't see anything that specifically addressed legal documents as sources. Please direct me to where specifically in Wikipedia policy the issue of legal or official documents provided as proof exists. (added in this dif)

Regarding the other changes requested regarding my criminal record at this time I would also like to request further review from someone else in Wikipedia, perhaps the legal department. Someone that would review a claim of libel and/or defamation regarding Wikipedia for arbitration. Regarding the other changes requested concerning my incomplete criminal record within the bio at this time. I would also like to request further review from someone else in Wikipediafor the purpose of further arbitration regarding official legal documents used as sources to establish facts. (changed in this dif and this dif)

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 13:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

are you threatening legal action? if you are, you will be banned from Wikipedia per Wikipedia:No legal threats which is policy. If you are not, please strike that. That is not something to mess around with. I am cutting you slack by asking. Please respond quickly - if you do not, I will assume it was a legal threat and you will be promptly banned. Jytdog (talk) 13:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
the current change you are asking for is OK, by the way, with the exception of "full restitution" ( you could not restore everything since you didn't possess everything) and I am making it. the legal threat issue remains open. Jytdog (talk) 13:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree with the change, for reasons given above. WP:BALASPS is imho the relevant policy here, and the reason why this falls below the radar of WP:BLPSELFPUB and/or why a viable application of WP:PRIMARY is uncalled for here. --Francis Schonken (talk) 13:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
francis the change is fully supported by the sources provided. I would not make a change that wasn't. Jytdog (talk) 13:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't say it wasn't supported by the sources, and I appreciate your work in checking these. What I say is that in the whole of the reliable sources on Rick Alan Ross (including those passing WP:BLPSELFPUB) these early convictions are generally treated in the margin, so Wikipedia should not give them more attention than the reliable sources generally do. --Francis Schonken (talk) 13:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Rick, thanks for striking the legal-threat-ish language. Francis, a few words do not lend UNDUE weight, and they help resolve the issues here. please unrevert. thanks. Jytdog (talk) 13:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jytdog--your edit was not exactly correct. To be accurate it must read -- In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was charged for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home, which was plead down to trespassing. The charge was plead down through a plea agreement, which provided for the final conviction of "trespassing," which is a misdemeanor, not a felony. Very important distinctions. I was never convicted of burglary. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 14:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right now I am trying to understand Francis's objection, which doesn't make sense to me. Francis, please do reply. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is what the "Beyond belief" source has:

[Ross] ... falling into trouble with the law. In 1974, he was convicted for the attempted burglary of a vacant show house and sentenced to probation. The following year he was sentenced to five years' probation after he and a friend embezzled property from a jewellery company.

This is what I proposed above:

In his early twenties Ross ran into justice twice, once for attempted burgulary, and once for the embezzlement of property.[1] In 1983 Ross was vacated of guilt for both cases, and his civil rights were restored.[2]

  • The first sentence is a summary of the secondary source (shorter, the essentials). That's what Wikipedia generally does: summarizing secondary sources.
  • The second sentence is the WP:BLPSELFPUB/WP:PRIMARY based content. On second thought, I wrote above, I would not retain the "vacated" part of the sentence, so I would propose something like "Ross's civil rights were restored in 1983" for the second sentence.
Currently the paragraph reads:

In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was convicted of the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and sentenced to probation.[1] The following year, he robbed a jewelry store in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime and received four years probation.[1][3]

Ross' latest proposal reads:

In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was charged for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home, which was plead down to trespassing. He was sentenced to probation.[1] The following year, he robbed a jewelry store in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime, restored the property in his possession, and received four years probation.[1][3]

I'm open to including something about "probation" etc. as long as the whole treatment of these incidents does not exceed the current length of the paragraph (e.g. "Phoenix", true but circumstantial, no need to retain that in a summary: for the whole importance of those incidents in Ross's biography – who has a biography here for being a deprogrammer, with a much more famous case later in life, etc. – whether that early incident was in Phoenix or in the next town has near to zero relevance.) --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Jason Scott case is 25 years ago and though it may be a focus for cults and my critics to attack me, it really isn't why this bio is up here. This bio is here because of the Cult Education Institute Web presences (1996-present). People that are angry about the database and message board use Wikipedia to discredit me. They often focus on the Scott case though there are other court cases of equal importance and much more current that I have been involved in as an expert witness or defendant. My critics at Wikipedia always want everything positive brief, if at all visible, and anything negative in detail with POV footnotes from scholars, etc. The editing of this bio has often been used as a place to attack me and/or my work. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Johnstone, Nick (December 12, 2004). "Beyond Belief". The Observer. London. Retrieved October 24, 2008.
  2. ^ Rick Ross Application for Restoration of Civil Rights at culteducation.com
  3. ^ a b Ortega, Tony (November 30, 1995). "Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlatans. Clients of deprogrammer Rick Ross call him a savior. Perhaps that's why people he's branded cult leaders want to crucify him". Phoenix New Times. Retrieved April 27, 2006.
thanks for clarifying. the "hush hush sweet charlatan" source says:"Some of the pieces his partner had taken had been melted down, but everything in Ross' possession was returned to the store. Ross was sentenced to four years' probation." That is the source for the restitution part of the probation length for the jewelry store robbery. i forgot which source said what, sorry. are you OK with the edit now, if we add that source? Jytdog (talk) 15:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When something is added (of course with appropriate sourcing), some superfluous detail should best be taken out. Maybe best to write the proposal here before implementing. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:28, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Schonken--full recovery of the stolen items is not "superfluous." If you are not willing to include the wording necessary to have an accurate balanced NPOV history of my court criminal record then perhaps it's superfluous to include anything and just delete the whole paragraph. No one asks me about any of it in media interviews. It's a topic of interest for cult members and critics who use it to attack me. They don't ever discuss any of the details such as restitution, probation cut short for good conduct or that the charges were later dismissed and my guilty verdicts expunged by the court. That is not what they want people to see in my bio. They just want the bad stuff and leave out the rest. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 16:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Really? You make us read walls of text, see the example above of the word I indicated as superfluous ("e.g. "Phoenix", true but circumstantial, no need to retain that in a summary: for the whole importance of those incidents in Ross's biography – who has a biography here for being a deprogrammer, with a much more famous case later in life, etc. – whether that early incident was in Phoenix or in the next town has near to zero relevance."), thanks for reading what I write (and not imagining things I didn't write). --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Schonken: My biography is here because of rickross.com, which before the rapper became famous, was known as the entry point to one of the largest archives about cults on the Web. I sold the domain name some time ago because of the name association with the rapper Rick Ross. Now the database is culteducation.com. The Web presence is why the bio is here and why people want to use it to attack me. The Jason Scott intervention is one of 500 interventions I have done (1982-present) and one of six times I have been sued by cult lawyers. The other five lawsuits were about free speech issues. I prevailed in all of that litigation. One of those lawsuits (NXIVM) is cited here. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I propose adding 38 words per the following:

In 1974 Ross was charged for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home, which was plead down to trespassing. He was sentenced to probation.[1] The following year, he was charged with conspiracy to commit grand theft. Ross confessed to the crime, returned the property in his possession, and received four years probation.[1][3] His probation was terminated early in 1979 for good conduct. In 1983 by court order Ross' criminal record was expunged, all charges dismissed and his civil rights restored. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've done here everything we can do, based on good sources. Please leave this alone, and let's move on. Jytdog (talk) 19:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

arbitrary break for request 9

Please do the following necessary edit:

In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was arrested for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home, pleaded guilty for trespassing, and was sentenced to probation.[8] The following year,[1] he was convicted of conspiracy to commit grand theft regarding a jewelry store. Ross confessed to the crime, restored the property in his possession, and received probation, which was ended early for good conduct in 1979.[8] In 1983 his criminal record was expunged and his civil rights restored by court order. Rick Alan Roass173.72.57.223 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ric:
  • what is the source for: "which was ended early for good conduct in 1979."
  • What is the source for "In 1983 his criminal record was expunged and his civil rights restored by court order."
Please answer briefly and provide a source for each of those. I will then take this to RSN and we will get community feedback on that. Jytdog (talk) 21:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have the original document issued by the Arizona Department of Probation and signed by the Deputy Adult Probation Officer on January 18, 1979. I also have the original document signed by the judge in Arizona Superior Court vacating judgements of guilt against me, dismissing all charges and restoring my civil rights June 7, 1983. These documents are online and their authenticity has never been contested, but I am willing to produce them physically to resolve this matter. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 22:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Third paragraph redundant

The third paragraph is redundant. There is already a subsection in the topic box about the Jason Scott case and anyone interested can go there or to the Wikipedia pages about Jason Scott and/or the Cult Awareness Network, through links provided. I propose that the third paragraph be shortened as follows:

Ross went through two court proceedings over the 1991 involuntary deprogramming of Jason Scott. As a result of the legal risks involved, he stopped advocating involuntary interventions for adults, preferring instead voluntary interventions without the use of force or restraint. He states that despite refinement of the process over the years, cult intervention work continues to depend on the same basic principles originated through deprogramming.[6]

I also propose deleting the redundant text in the Jason Scott section as follows:

As a result of the legal risks involved, Ross stopped advocating coercive deprogramming or involuntary interventions for adults, preferring instead voluntary exit counseling without the use of force or restraint.[6] He states that despite refinement of processes over the years, cult intervention work continues to depend on the same basic principles originated through deprogramming.[6] Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Rick please read WP:LEAD and then re-think what you wrote above. Jytdog (talk) 19:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jytdog:read WP:LEAD. Please be more specific. I don't see how my proposed edit is not in complete compliance with the guidelines of summarizing in the opening.Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 20:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

the lead summarizes the body. so it makes no sense to say that anything in the lead is redundant. Jytdog (talk) 21:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My edit accomplishes that exactly. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 21:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked you several times to ask for one change at a time and to provide sources for everything new you want to add. You continue to ignore me. So I am done responding to you. I was willing to try to help you but you have used up all my good will. Goodbye. Jytdog (talk) 22:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you feel that way. Thank you for your time. I am doing my best to work with Wikipedia guidelines. I think the edits offered are quite reasonable. Nothing new. Everything is old and already sourced so there is no need for new sources. The last paragraph in the lead summarizes legal situation that occurred succinctly. The edit to the Jason Scott subsection deletes redundancy and that section has support links for further information. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 22:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is not about how i feel. you abused my good will and took no consideration for my time, or for what any wikipedia editor will need to work with you. if you treat people this way, no one will help you. everybody can see what has happened here. Most people will probably ignore you now. Jytdog (talk) 23:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully you are wrong. If not then Wikipedia is very sad and bad place where anything goes regardless of facts, documentation or in the interest of being any kind of meaningful information resource. I am not here as a volunteer. I tried to have this bio deleted after years of it being used as a propaganda platform for cults and their supporters. I am here now at the suggestion of the Wikipedia Support team. You insulted me personally, as did the editor, and I ignored it in deference to Wikipedia. I never abused your good will. Why don't you just for second imagine what it's like to have anonymous editors raking over your personal history from 40 years ago to construct a negative narrative, which dismisses facts and twists words for their own POV. Have some consideration for the way that professional people like me are dragged into Wikipedia and vilified with little if any policing being done here. Pretty shameful. If no one cares in this community cares then shame on Wikipedia. Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 00:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC) 173.72.57.223 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rick_Alan_Ross&oldid=664195566"