Talk:Bruce Hyman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] Verification of arrest and charges

News of Hyman's arrest - for perverting the course of justice, can be confirmed by phoning the press officer at Taunton Police, who will confirm that a 48-year old man was arrested in london, if you ask them for news about Bruce Hyman. He has been bailed until 17th January 2007. 194.203.201.92 12:11, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

This is made the more significant because he is documented as being a script/speech writer for the UK Chancellor and likely heir to the Prime Ministerial throne Gordon Brown, whose reputation is unlikely to be enhanced when it becomes known what Hyman is alleged to have done. --anon

But there is nothing about this at Google News or, it seems, anywhere. Paul Beardsell 23:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Try contacting the Taunton Police Press Office: http://www.locallife.co.uk/taunton/police3.asp. When I spoke to them I asked what they had to say about Hyman being arrested on 31-Oct and they just said "a 48-year-old man was arrested in London on suspicion of perverting the course of justice". If someone else (i.e. a respected wikipedian) could corroborate that, maybe it would be allowable to put it in the main article, from which coconut-man keeps deleting it. The UK Press haven't picked up on it, which is why us humble Internet folk need to make sure these things come out. Once that's established than the UK Establishment won't be able to keep a lid on it any longer. The guy is, after all, a very successful Media lawyer and speech writer for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Would you really expect to find anything about it on Google News? But if someone in a different jurisdiction (Paul?) confirms what's been written anonymously here, we might start to get somewhere. Meanwhile, if you're into Stumble Upon or deli.cio.us, be sure to vote for this page. It's always good (and good for wikipedia in this case) when a big story breaks via the Internet because the poodle paid-for press are too scary-rarified to touch it! 84.9.50.104 08:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

What about the new WP living biography rules? See especially Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Non-public_figures Paul Beardsell 16:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

If the only "confirmation" that can be gained right now is a phone call, that could be construed as a violation of WP:OR, and wouldn't be usable. Perhaps if there's a trial.... --JohnDBuell 17:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I heard that a Daily Mail writer had researched this story, but they were scared off by Hyman's own laywers, not wanting the word to get out. Now that he has been arrested and bailed, it's all sub judice, so we just have to wait till January to see what happens. On the other hand if there are any hacks out there who want a very good story, watch this space. 66.232.97.204 11:17, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] News Coverage

The charity Families Need Fathers published a front page article headed "Unreliable Evidence" in its most recent newsletter. The story was about alleged skulduggery by a barrister in the family court, operating to the detriment of a small girl who wanted to be with her dad. There is no direct suggestion that the story involves Hyman. Hyman's radio program, produced with Clive Anderson, is called Unreliable Evidence. The published story is about a barrister who it is alleged forged evidence that was presented in court in good faith. 194.203.201.92 12:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What NOT to do

I removed the "Worthwhile Contributor" section, as it could be construed as a personal attack, in violation of Wikipedia policy (WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL). The repeated blanking of this page and another has been reported to site administrators. Per WP:BLP policy, a verifiable source that other persons could access (without, in my case, having to make a Trans-Atlantic phone call) would be the preferred method of re-entering the information in the main article. Until or unless such a source is found, it must remain OUT of the article. --JohnDBuell 17:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)