Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudio Teehankee, Jr.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep. Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Claudio Teehankee, Jr.

Claudio Teehankee, Jr. (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable crime, violation of WP:BLP1E. There's nothing here to hang a biography on, it's just the reporting of a crime which would not be notable at all if this person weren't related to somebody famous. Corvus cornix_talk 21:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Per WP:BIO, not notable Jeepday (talk) 04:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Keep and cleanup based on below comments. D.M.N. (talk) 14:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Comment. I'm not sure. I managed to find quite a bit on google--not all of it usable--but I was struck by how much material there was to be found in English on the web about a relatively routine crime. This would seem to suggest that Teehankee's trial was a media circus ala OJ Simpson in the Phillipines, as it indicates that: "The accused blames the press for his conviction as he contends that the publicity given to his case impaired his right to an impartial trial", "the trial of appellant was given a day-to-day, gavel-to-gavel coverage" and "the barrage of publicity that characterized the investigation and trial of the case". (Also of note, Teehankee "presented in court no less than 7 newspaper reporters and relied heavily on selected portions of their reports for his defense. The defense’s documentary evidence consists mostly of newspaper clippings relative to the investigation of the case at bar and which appeared to cast doubt on his guilt. The press cannot be fair and unfair to appellant at the same time".) This 2007 article on Newsbreak seems to suggest that the 1991 case has lasting notability, as it lists solely among the "most celebrated cases" of Dennis Villa-Ignacio "the conviction of Claudio Teehankee Jr., son of the late Supreme Court Chief Justice Claudio Teehankee, in the 1991 Maureen Hultman murder case". I note that WP:BLP1E doesn't indicate that persons known for one thing are not suitable for biographies, but rather that they may not be. I've left a notice of this AfD at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines in case any of the contributors there can provide context, since my linguistic limitations rather hamper my ability to assess this. :) I'll be keeping an eye on it, as further contributions may help me hop off the fence. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Hopping off the fence now, as I find the below persuasive and the additional note about the impact of this case on the death penalty does suggest a larger notability. I agree that revising to an event article is probably appropriate and would be happy to help out with this (using the limited English sources available) if the article survives AfD. Somebody would need to tell me what to move it to, though, as I'm not at all sure. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Looking at other murder case articles, it seems that it is either the suspect or the victims that are in the title. Since massacres or murder cases here in the Phils. are named after there victims (Vizconde massacre, Payumo massacre etc.), I suggest moving it to Hultman-Chapman murder case I'll try help convert the article once it is kept.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
• No vote/comment -- he was the son of Claudio Teehankee, former Chief Justice of the Philippine Supreme Court. --Howard the Duck 16:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. These perspectives may help, as I was in college during that time. I could vouch that the murder and succeeding trial dominated news coverage in the Philippines during that pre-Internet period. That he was the son of a Chief Justice was only one reason for that. The victims were very well-off, and the killings took place in one of the richest enclaves in the Philippines. One victim, Maureen Hultman, was a pretty aspiring model who lingered for several weeks before dying, there being a prolonged media vigil outside her hospital room, supplying daily new footage of the comatose victim juxtaposed with her modeling audition tapes. I hesitate though to vote keep because I personally thought the media coverage then was excessive and sensationalized, though news dominance of that story should be a more determinative factor. Also, the murders were among a series of early-1990s high-profile "heinous crimes" that swayed public opinion and Congress to restore the death penalty sometime in 1993. Other such crimes include the Vizconde massacre and the U.P. Los Banos killings for which Mayor Antonio Sánchez was convicted. Teehankee's crime alone was not decisive in restoring the death penalty, but it contributed to a swelling atmosphere of fear of violent crimes. In fact, Hultman's mother ran (but lost) for the Philippine Senate in 1992 on a platform advocating victim's rights. I don't think O.J. is a fair analogy, since he would have been notable even if the crime didn't occur. Murderers who are significant only because of their crimes may be a more appropriate comparison, such as Scott Peterson or even Lizzie Borden, though the coverage and fame of Teehankee Jr. is certainly more localized.Anyo Niminus (talk) 17:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment The problem with things that happened in the Philippines during the 90's is that there is a lack of online sources for it. However, I believe that the article must be converted and renamed to describe the killings rather than the suspect. I also found a source regarding Anyo Niminus's claim that it indeed influenced the legality of the death penalty in the Philippines. I'd like to thank Moonriddengirl for reaching out to us and not do a drive-by deletion vote.--Lenticel ^(talk) 07:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment My classmate Manuel Antonio Teehankee duplicated the feat of his father 44 years ago when he topped our 1983 Bar Exams, and I was 12th place with 87.55%, with only 21.3% passers, record low in bar history. In fact Ateneo and UP law schools passed only about 45%. Devastating. While Jr. Teehankee may not have been at notable as them, still, the tragedy catapulted him to being notable. He is not just anybody who has 15 minutes of fame. He is has a royal blood. Just sayin. I vote for non-deletion since Filipino users will benefit from this which has global impact on murder. ---Florentino floro (talk) 10:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, then edit. The crime the subject committed was a HUGE news story in the Philippines. Argument brought by the nominator is simply systemic bias. Starczamora (talk) 02:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Then modify the page to become an event article instead of a biography (like Claudio Teehankee, Jr. murder case). The murder itself is notable but that seems to be the only thing notable for Teehankee Jr. --seav (talk) 04:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Change to article about the event In the first place it shouldn't start off by telling us who he is related to. Steve Dufour (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep It is notable. One thing though, changing to an article abouth the event makes sense, but there will still need to be a redirect to that new article from this one. Moheroy (talk) 19:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep the entry - it was a truly heinous crime, and demonstrates that even those related to great men are not above the law in the Philippines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbara Manilena (talk • contribs) 07:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.