Talk:Bowraville murders

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bowraville murders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141030040816/https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA20060927005?open&refNavID=HA8_1 to https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA20060927005?open&refNavID=HA8_1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Identity of the Suspect

Seeing as there is currently a court hearing taking place on this matter, and seeing as in this case the name of the suspect is not being disclosed, I have removed all mention of his identity. Do not rewrite the article to include his name, as that would be a breach of confidentiality. Similarly, there is a non-publication order placed on much of the evidence regarding that hearing, and the names of multiple informants are not being disclosed, so if you happen to know those details, do not release them. Thanks, Annatarion (talk) 00:17, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

There appears still to be a non-publication order, even though the appeal to the High Court was unsuccessful, and he can't now be tried. I note an editor has added his name to the article, but only once. Wikipedia was not bound by the order on George Pell. I don't know what the position is here.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:57, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Sources etc

Regarding the tags, I can't see any evidence of original research, and the level of citation isn't that bad. But I question the information provided:

He was last seen leaving the party on his way to a house to sleep and his remains were found about two weeks later by farmers.

In fact, Speedy was "last seen" sleeping at the suspect's caravan.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:59, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I have removed the tags from the article. I have tagged the remaining sentences that don't have citations. I don't think there should be much trouble finding references for these, if they are true.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:24, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Neutrality

I have tried to remove bias. For example, the repeated statements that despite strong evidence the accused was acquitted. The statement of similarities is problematic. Particularly problematic is the statement that both Evelyn Greenup and Clinton Speedy suffered trauma to the head. I amended that from "blunt force trauma" because that wasn't in the source. Based on the sources I've seen, Evelyn Greenup's remains showed signs of blow with a sharp implement to the skull, while Speedy appeared to have a broken jaw. This was after the remains had decayed to a great degree. It seems to me to be misleading to say that is a similarity. And with Colleen Walker there is no evidence how she died (if she died). This article should be checked for other POV problems. The problem is that the media articles are generally biased and routinely make misleading claims...--Jack Upland (talk) 09:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Dan Box

I've removed the following:

In May 2016, The Australian newspaper released a weekly podcast examining the murders of the three children. Narrated by crime reporter Dan Box, the podcast resulted in significant national attention being placed on the three unsolved murders.

This has no citation. Yes, the Australian had a podcast, but (except for Box's own claims) I haven't seen anything to say this was more influential than any number of media reports. And then there's the campaigning by the families, activists, politicians etc.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:38, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Note: now that he has written a book it is notable.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:02, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Murders? Killings? Disappearances?

This is problematic. We don't know that Colleen Walker is dead. We don't know how any of them died. It is possible that some deaths were accidental; for example, a hit-and-run car accident. We don't know there was a serial killer. That's just a theory. We shouldn't pretend the prosecution case is stronger than it is.--Jack Upland (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

BLP noticeboard

I raised this page on the BLP noticeboard. The discussion wasn't very helpful, but the participants said that XX's name shouldn't be mentioned here.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)