Talk:Dennis O'Neill case

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of issues surrounding adoption, foster care, child abandonment, and bereavement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Murder on appeal?[edit]

Numerous sources, e.g. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/jan/27/childrensservices.childprotection state that the sentence was revised after appeal to 10 years for murder.

Is there a particular reason why this article does not include that? 86.139.52.15 (talk) 19:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles do not spring into life fully formed. Information is added as it's discovered. If you find something additional then add it. -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Incidentally, apart from that Guardian article, I can find no evidence that Gough's sentence was changed on appeal. The Times doesn't seem to mention it, although it reported the original case extensively. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt reply and the update. It was exactly because no Google link (that I could find) showed that The Times had reported a change of sentence that I was curious and posted first. If you are reasonably sure that the Times archive has no report of a change of sentence, I suggest that we leave the article as it is. (Why the Guardian might have had their facts wrong in 2003 is not something this article needs to worry about). 31.68.141.246 (talk) 09:07, 24 May 2013 (UTC)