Talk:Clint Lorance

Blacklisted Links Found on Clint Lorance

Cyberbot II has detected links on Clint Lorance which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• https://www.change.org/p/us-army-lt-sentenced-to-20-years-charged-with-murder-for-protecting-his-men-from-taliban?recruiter=197910976

  Triggered by \bchange\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Presumption of innocence

This guy has been convicted, and the conviction has been reviewed. It's a gross error of NPOV to devote more space to his lawyers' claims of innocence than to the crime itself. Felsic2 (talk) 15:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

When does dismissal take effect?

Lorance was sentenced in August 2013 to, among other punishments, dismissal from the U.S. Army. As I understand it, such sentences are automatically reviewed by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals. After their ruling, the case may be further reviewed by the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, and ultimately by the U.S. Supreme Court. All of which could naturally take many years. In order to rightly refer to Lorance as a former first lieutenant, his dismissal (which as part of his sentence would be reviewable by all three levels of appellate courts) must have taken effect. Does that happen only once the appellate process is complete? KalHolmann (talk) 19:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I think each case is different; a discharge or dismissal is stayed pending an appeal taken from a trial court, but later courts in the appellate process may vary in their rulings. They might continue to stay a discharge, or let it take affect even though the defendant plans on appealing to a higher court (and likely while still incarcerated). The only way to find out the member's exact status (in this case, whether he is still 1LT Lorance right now or if he has already been dismissed) is to follow the proceedings, and these items are seldom covered in follow-up news reports. Not much resolution I'm afraid, but I hope that sheds some light on answering your question... Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Is it time to remove stub templates?

The article page has two separate stub icons: (1) crime-related article and (2) biographical article related to crime. I propose we can now remove both of those, since the article—while still short—is thorough and contains references to reliable sources. I don't mean to suggest the article is complete, but it's no longer a stub. KalHolmann (talk) 02:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. AzureCitizen (talk) 03:25, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Grapes are mines

Please replace "grapes" with land mines. Casual observers might think the platoon was walking through a farmer's grape vines, not a mine field where one mistake blows up at least one soldier. Hpfeil (talk) 22:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I think the grapes mentioned in passing were actual grapes, but the text did not represent the citation, which called the valley dangerous. --2601:CC:4200:2D7E:E8D3:1953:F32A:2D81 (talk) 15:05, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Facts of the Crime

Non-existent. I came here to read up on the facts of the crime and the witness testimony. There is none. This article is practically useless. In fact, it gives the impression details would be explained with the teaser line "Three men on a motorcycle were speeding towards the platoon and ignoring commands to stop." but it fails to deliver. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.37.203 (talk) 19:52, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

There's very little reason to take the claim as fact that the motorcycle was "speeding" in the direction of the platoon. Every account besides his states the motorcycle was "near" (as in, a hundred yards away) and from the account Michael McGuinness and other leaders of the platoon it was moving on a route parallel. I haven't found any other account besides Lorance's that implies that the motorcycle was approaching the platoon, much less "speeding."

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/07/01/army-officer-convicted-of-murder-in-afghanistan-to-get-another-look-by-civilian-court/

http://hellofawaytodie.libsyn.com/war-criminal-chat-the-clint-lorance-story-feat-michael-mcguinness — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.77.88.243 (talk) 18:06, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Here's the actual text from the cited article:

News media reports based on interviews with Mr. Lorance’s family and lawyers have described the motorcycle “speeding toward the platoon,” giving the lieutenant only seconds to act. But soldiers testified that the bike was about 200 yards away and could not have reached the platoon’s position in the grape fields.

The article casts serious doubt upon that specific claim yet it was written into the wiki page as if it was fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.77.88.243 (talk) 18:08, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Disgusting article

The evidence is all here in the article] from the Washington Post.

The Waffen SS would be proud. This article is apologist nonsense 81.159.166.13 (talk) 19:07, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Mistake

This says he was serving in the infantry. He wasn't. He was in the 4/73rd Cavalry Regiment. 206.85.106.68 (talk) 13:27, 8 February 2023 (UTC)