Talk:Barry Cohen (attorney)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
WikiProject Florida State University This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida State University. If you would like to help, you can edit this article or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. Start
This article has been rated as a Mid priority article Mid
To-do list for Barry Cohen (attorney): edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
    A fact from Barry Cohen (attorney) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 14 November 2007.
    Wikipedia


    Contents

    [edit] What are the POV and COI issues you wrote on my talk page? You have lost me? - Please explain what you mean1

    I merely referenced information from reputable newspapers and CNN. How is that POV or COI. Please explain. --Mattisse 22:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

    It is an article about the career of a high profile criminal attorney who handles many famous cases. There is a reference citation to a Larry King Live TV interview. I can't see where you are coming from. There are 9 footnotes from reliable sources. What do you want? --Mattisse 22:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

    Just because it is stated in a news source does not mean it is neutral. Encyclopedias require a much more formal tone than is found in the news media nowadays. I've removed the proposed deletion tag, but you need to clean the article up, as it may not pass in a full Articles for Deletion discussion. Dancter 23:46, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
    Just because it is stated in a news source does not mean it is NOT neutral. I am not touching the article again, after the way this was handled. You clean it up or delete it at your pleasure. The article was 30 minutes old before you started your tagging campaign. Tagging is fun, I know, and much easier than writing the articles yourself. Someone else can work on the article, or go for your deletion -- at your pleasure.
    I will go around tagging article now, per your example. And the issue is to try to get the new articles, right? The moldy POV, unreferenced,COI articles from 2003 is not as much fun to tag. --Mattisse 10:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
    I'm not saying that being stated in a news source automatically means it's NOT neutral, but when you use a sensationalized piece like Andelman's profile, without attributing the statement as his opinion, it is not in keeping with a neutral point of view. I was trying to help, by giving you a chance to improve on the article more, without completely dismissing the concerns of Treygdor, which although a bit rash, do have some basis. Not even JodyB was willing to remove the deletion tagging completely. While I do a bit of tagging, I also contribute a fair amount content-wise, so I feel it's unfair to insinuate that my edits to this article means I'm somehow lazy and flippant. I've tagged older articles, as well—anywhere I feel that there isn't sufficient impetus to make the changes that I feel are necessary. As for your proclaimed intent to start tagging articles, it sounds less like you actually believe in that practice, but are threatening to disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Tagging articles is not fun. Building articles is fun, but often the less-glamorous task of cleaning things up goes neglected. A little prodding is necessary sometimes to stimulate improvements. I am sorry if I offended you by implying that the cleanup was somehow your obligation; the cleanup tags are meant for anyone willing to make the changes. I only posted what I did before because I didn't see anyone else interested in keeping the article at the time. Dancter 19:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
    Sorry for my response to your helpful reply. I reacted poorly and apologize. Thank you for giving a rational, helpful reply. My original response was hot headed and idiotic. Thanks again for setting an example of a calm reply to my hot-tempered off-the-cuff reaction. Mattisse 15:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] COI charges made by User:Treygdor

    I am asking about the COI charge made by User:Treygdor. To what are you referring, User:Treygdor? You say on my talk page that you agree with the COI charge. Please explain for my edification.

    I will leave the articles for others to fix. A most unpleasant experience in dealing with you. --Mattisse 09:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Case of the Aisenburgs

    I don't think we need to write a lot about them, because the article is not about them, also it is a BLP concern because if people are only known for a case, we tend not to focus on them and people's opinions of the likeliness or otherwise of their guilt overly much, instead on the case itself. But in general we don't need whole paragraphs about them, and beliefs about them, because the article is about Mr Cohen anyway if you think about it. They need to be mentioned, but apart from an explanation of his role, discussing their case at length is a bit of a tangent, if you don't mind me saying.:)Merkinsmum 18:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

    You are right, although at this point there is nothing controversial to say about them. The most personal is their transcript on Larry King Live. I know about a lot of great Barry Cohen cases, but I can't seem to find anything about him on the web. He first came to my attention when a chiropractor in a huge speed boat went through a slow speed zone very, very fast, killing seven people with many witnesses. And the chiropractor had been drinking. Cohen got him off completely. I've admire him a long time, along with Ellis Rubin and other attorneys that pull off the unexpected and the impossible. Mattisse 18:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] aisenburg case

    Ok, page is currently about the Aisenburg case. It's a much better article! But needs to be renamed accordingly.:) Make a separate page specifically about the A case, then we can see if we have much more to say about Mr.Cohen. Or this could be a redirect to thereMerkinsmum 13:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    It is listed on DYK right now. You could go to DYK and explain your objections and suggest a remedy. Probably the DYK editors will suggest a name change if they feel one is in order. I'll have to think about rewriting the DYK entry or removing it. Mattisse 14:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
    Also, the original article had more about the Aisenburg case and I was planning to add more and might have changed the name then. But did not you say what I already had violated BLP and you removed the material? Or was that someone else. I am getting confused! --Mattisse 14:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
    No that was me lol but I said it should focus on the case, rather than the couple, which the article as it stands does well. And I said it was sort of a tangent off Barry C to discuss the ins and outs of Aisenburgs that much. As it is the intro would just need to be changed by a couple of sentences, for it to be an article about the case.

    It will get the DYK anyway, because it's a new article and no doubt you supplied an interesting DYK for it. A redirect would still go somewhere, it wouldn't effect the DYK. We could move at some point anyway, there's no particular hurry.:)Merkinsmum 14:12, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    Usually the DYK people suggest a move if one is urgently needed. They have in the past. In this case, I don't want to write about the Aisenburg case anyway. It has been publicized to death and there is not much more to do than regurgitate all the publicity. The most interesting thing about the case now is that Barry Cohen actually managed to win compensation under the Hyde Amendment. I cannot find even one case where an attorney has won anything, although I am sure there must be a few around. Cohen has never lost a case. When I have time, I will read through all the court petitions and findings to figure out how he did it. Unlike Ellis Rubin, Cohen prefers to fly under the radar and doesn't coin publicity-grabbing defenses or go in for courtroom theatrics. --Mattisse 15:23, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Cohen info

    • This is a case where Cohen defended William LaTorre, the Pinellas chiropractor acquitted in the deaths of four teenagers in a 1989 boating accident.[1]
    • Bio - Cohen graduated from Florida State University in 1962 and got his law degree from Mercer University in 1966. His clients have included former Hillsborough State Attorney E.J. Salcines.[2]

    Mattisse 20:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    Cohen also defended his friend, Gable Yerrid, who was driving his muscle car when he killed Christi.

    Jennifer Porter hired Barry Cohen before she announced she was the driver of the Toyota Echo involved in the hit and run accident that killed two children and put two in the hospital. Cohen was able to prevent Porter from receiving a prison sentence for killing two children, putting two children in the hospital and fleeing the scene of the crime.[1] After her sentence of probation, Porter requested that her teaching certificate be restored. Cohen said her excellent character references plus the expert testimony provided that explained how she suffered psychological trauma, testimony that convinced the judge to give her probation, should persuade the state panel to let Porter maintain her teaching certification.[2]

    Barry Cohen was hired briefly as Nick Bollea's attorney son of professional wrestler Hulk Hogan but confirmed today that he is no longer representing Bollea. Bollea, 17, was the driver of a yellow Toyota Supra at a high rate of speed when he lost control, according to police.[3]

    1. ^ The Jennifer Porter Case. Tampa Tribune (November 5 2005). Retrieved on 2007-11-09.
    2. ^ Child Killer Wants teaching Certificate Restored (April 19 2007). Retrieved on 2007-11-09.
    3. ^ Barry Cohen out as Bollea's attorney (August 28 2007). Retrieved on 2007-11-09.

    --Mattisse 21:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    Ooooh I'm liking it more now it has several things he's got upto in it, it's more comprehensive etc.:)Merkinsmum 23:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    I discovered that rather than look up Barry Cohen (of which there is virtually no information), if I googled around for the people he defended instead, his name pops right up. --Mattisse 00:08, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Reads like an advertisement

    This entry reads like an advertisement for Barry Cohen. It's full of nothing but enthusiastic praise, and the language is not objective. "Astute knowledge of the law"? Come on.

    I wonder who created the entry, and what his or her relationship is to Cohen.

    I have nothing against Cohen, and he may well be a good lawyer, but this is overly promotional. Nbauman 13:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

    Removed phrase you objected to: "Astute knowledge of the law", and replaced with quotes from reference source. --Mattisse 13:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)