Talk:Killing of Adam Toledo

Gang affiliation, Neutral POV

Should we include information about the allegations that Toledo may have been affiliated with a gang? My edit adding details about the allegations of Toledo having been affiliated with a gang were deleted because it goes against WP:NPOV. I personally don't think so because it states that some have alleged it, but that it is as of yet unproven, so it gives both sides. I think it is quite relevant to overall case, and it was mentioned or implied by multiple notable Chicago figures, including John Catanzara and George Cardenas. Lori Lightfoot seemed to heavily imply it when she stated in a speech addressing Toledo's death: "Gangs are preying on our most vulnerable, corrupting these young minds with promises of familia and lucre. Like good shepherds, we have to better tend to our flocks to keep the wolves at bay. And when the wolves dare try to take one of ours, we must hit them hard with the staff of a community united against the evils that threaten our youth."

This is what I wrote in my edit:

"Due to the gang retaliation following Toledo's death and the circumstances surrounding it, along with the fact that the area he was shot in is a Latin Kings stronghold, some, including the Chicago Fraternal Order of Police union president, John Catanzara, have suspected that he was part of a gang, namely the Latin Kings; however, this is currently unknown.[29][30][31]"

Is there a better way to word this, or should it not be included? I feel like just leaving it as it is now: "He had no prior criminal record and was 13 years old when he was killed," ironically gives the false impression that he was unquestionably innocent, even if it doesn't explicitly state it. Wikipedia's Biggest Fan (talk) 22:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I think that Snopes is not going to be considered a reliable source for this. The BBC article does not state there was a gang affiliation, it merely states one person's claim that there was, thus if it's to be used as a source it must be attributed to that person, not the BBC or Wikipedia voice. The Sun Times doesn't directly make any claims about Toledo's relationship to any gang, but does cover the gangs' retaliation after his death. That being said, I'm not sure why Praxidicae feels it is "not neutral" when WP:DUE says we give at least some weight to the claims since multiple reliable sources are giving weight to them. I think the fact that the BBC, a very large and well respected international news source is giving the claims by this person credibility in one of their main articles about the shooting suggests we should be including a statement about the unknown affiliation and an attributed claim to the person making the claim he was definitely affiliated. As sad as it would be to everyone, there are certainly gangs not just in Chicago but in large cities around the world that prey on children who they can get to do their "dirty work" for them, and we'd be abdicating our duty as a neutral encyclopedia to not include information about it simply because it makes the "narrative" look worse.

Of note, a mother told a reliable source (local news) that boys commonly go from playing sports to gang colors the next day, other reliable sources have also ran stories on gangs and teenagers in the aftermath, NPR has also examined the gang activity in the area and how they prey on children, even the mayor of Chicago has implied that he may have been in contact with gangs by talking about "lessen(ing) the allure of gang life. Regardless of one's personal beliefs, a vast amount of reliable sources are dedicating space (if not whole stories) to children who are impressed upon by gangs - and even if it's not shown yet whether Toledo was or was not affiliated with one, it deserves mention because of those that do discuss gangs, they do not adamantly deny that Toledo was affiliated with a gang. Maybe the wording needs some work, but given the BBC and other organizations are giving this one person's claim weight in their articles means that per WP:DUE we must as well. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 22:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree. Also, I do not want to use ad hominem, but I looked at the page of the user who deleted my edit, and they had some anti-police brutality imagery on there, so there may be some bias involved here (not that their actions were necessarily motivated by this, but it is a possibility). How do you think we should go about wording his gang affiliation allegations so as to retain a neutral POV and objectively give both sides? I was having trouble with it myself; although, I tried to do it to the best of my ability. Perhaps we should also include the family or whoever else denying it if they have? Wikipedia's Biggest Fan (talk) 01:21, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

We dont include gossip in our articles, and as a recently deceased person Toledo is also covered by WP:BLP. As far as the quote from the mother, that is a serious misunderstanding of what she said. She did not say go from playing sports to gang colors the next day, the phrasing "One day you see them with their soccer jersey on. The next day you see them in colors … gang colors" is not necessary literal, just as saying "one day they tell you coffee is good for you the next they say it is bad" is not literal. Regardless, there is nothing about Toledo in there. Besides that there is unsubstantiated gossip from a police union official and nothing else. Material about gang violence in Little Village belongs in the article on Little Village. nableezy - 02:13, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed as long as we explicitly attribute it to him and stress that it is unproven, considering we allow unproven allegations of other types on Wikipedia, such as sexual assault allegations. There are even whole pages dedicated to Trump and Biden's sexual misconduct allegations, just to give an example. Wikipedia's Biggest Fan (talk) 02:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

That isnt an allegation though, the head of the FOP isnt a. speaking for the police to make such an allegation, or b. have any special insight in to Toledo that would make him a reliable source. It is an unsubstantiated allegation backed by no official source. Those sexual misconduct allegations are well covered in reliable source reporting on the allegations, not merely repeating what one person who has no knowledge of the issue said without any evidence. Being head of the FOP doesnt make your unsubstantiated allegations worth any weight here. nableezy - 03:15, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

This is WP:UNDUE. Virtually no RSs make the allegation that Toledo was a member of a gang. Strong disagree with @Berchanhimez's idea that RSs need to explicitly deny that Toledo was in a gang for it to be undue. This is totally backwards - RSs would need to make an explicit allegation that Toledo was in a gang for the allegation to be due. We don't put things in articles because no RSs have denied them. Per WP:UNDUE If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, it does not belong on Wikipedia, regardless of whether it is true or you can prove it, except perhaps in some ancillary article. The number of RSs claiming that Toledo was in a gang is approximately zero, and the amount of space we dedicate on this page to accusing Toledo of being in a gang should accordingly be zero. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 19:45, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Have I said that? I haven't, just FYI. I've said that if reliable sources are discussing gang activity in association with Toledo's death then gang activity should be discussed here - not necessarily implying he was involved but at least discussed. It is not a small minority - multiple national news organizations have discussed gang activity while discussing his death - thus it's not undue at all. We don't have to claim he was in a gang, but right now this article doesn't even discuss that part of the reason for his death was the history of gang violence which likely raised tension on police and the community - and it should do so. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 23:57, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I was responding in particular to this comment of yours: Regardless of one's personal beliefs, a vast amount of reliable sources are dedicating space (if not whole stories) to children who are impressed upon by gangs - and even if it's not shown yet whether Toledo was or was not affiliated with one, it deserves mention because of those that do discuss gangs, they do not adamantly deny that Toledo was affiliated with a gang. I disagree that the insinuation that Toldeo was a 'child impressed upon by a gang' is one that 'deserves mention' simply because 'it is not adamantly denied' by any sources and maintain that this is a backwards way to view WP:DUE. If this is not what you meant with that sentence, then I apologize for misinterpreting it and would appreciate any clarification. I'm less opposed to including a more generalized context of gang violence as long as it reflects what the majority of RSs have published. I'll note that we should be cautious in doing so due to WP:BLP regarding Ruben Roman - allegations that a gang 'put the gun in Adam's hand' for example should be treated with extreme scrutiny. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 07:32, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Livingroom window vs bodycam

The witness description, given not under oath, from across the street and through a window, of an event which took place in just a few seconds, is not relevant and I've removed it. The bodycam footage is definitive and speaks for itself. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:26, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Officer crying?

Could we some text about the officer reportedly crying after shooting the subject? I'm new to Wikipedia and I don't want to mess the article up. CirclePulse (talk) 00:39, 22 October 2023 (UTC)