Talk:George Davis (armed robber)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

	Cricket Portal Click here for information about how the WikiProject assesses notability George Davis (armed robber) is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Categories and templates: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is fully and correctly categorised and carries all appropriate templates. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

[edit] misleading information

To reply to the brief "MISLEADING INFORMATION" point of discussion raised in the brief paragraph immediately below this one. The reason why Davis IS described as an armed robber is NOT because he was guilty of the Ilford LEB April 1974 robbery although as the article makes clear after his December 1975 failed appeal hearing he was still not declared innocent when in May 1976 even though he was suddenly released extraordinarily by Royal Prerogative with many years still to serve. He is described primarily as an armed robber because (1) that was the original controverial allegation against him and (2) and more legitimately so because after his May 1976 release he WAS arrested actually on a second armed robbery in London (23 September 1977) at The Bank of Cyprus, Seven Sisters Road, London - as indicated in the article. The article also now clarifies that Davis is currently seeking still to overturn the original 1974 LEB robbery conviction. So I don't vote for a move. An additional observation is that the State authorities by making the decisions they did at various junctures complicated and compounded the issues in the way the article indicates. At first sight matters appear contradictory but that is the way in which matters still stand in this extraordinary case at this juncture. The Guntz --TheGuntz (talk) 23:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

surely the page should not be titled george davis (armed robber) when it then goes on to say he didnt do it? also the opening paragraph calls him an armed robber. i vote for a move -ross616- (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I am adding context to the mis-identification of Davis because baldly stating that the identification evidence was unreliable doesn't adquately explain other factors that greatly motivated those involved in tne Davis campaign. TheGuntz 15:50, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I have further contextualised the Davis Campaign to better convey some sense of what else was going on parallel to the campaign and where some of the political energies and expeinece came from which significantly influenced ongoing events. It would be very worthwhile for Wikipedia to have an item on the UP AGAINST THE LAW COLLECTIVE.

[edit] G Davis

Seems worth the work: I have started on this article --Gordo 22:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I am just wondering why there is no mention of the Cricket Test Match that was ruined by putting oil on the pitch in this cause. Can someone enlighten?

The point raised immediately above is puzzling because under the "CAMPAIGN" section of the article there are various references to the August 1975 Headingly Test Cricket Match sabotage . These references appear adequate as this article is not basically about cricket. In fact the sabotage was commited overnight and the pitch was therefore not useable the following day although on that day the weather was bad too and it is likely that cricket could not have been played in any event - not that the latter ironical eventuality was much discussed publically at the time. TheGuntz.

"RELEASE COLLECTIVE"

From the article I am not clear how by whom and why this description is being queried - I worked for RELEASE for 5 plus years and we described ourselves as a "COLLECTIVE" hence the use of this description. Not everybody on the planet would refer to RELEASE as a COLLECTIVE but in the historical period with which the article primarily deals it was so described. I hope this will suffice - if not discus further. I was a co-author of award winning "TROUBLE WITH THE LAW: The RELEASE Bust Book" published 1978 the included introductory paragraphs of which state: "we have developed a collective of fourteen paid full-time workers ...". Furthermore this is a description provided in "RELEASE NEWS" Vol.5 No.3. published Autumn 1978 "we are a national alternative legal and welfare organisation working on a collective basis ...". this edition of NEWS RELEASE carried a full retrospective of the GEORGE DAVIS CAMPAIGN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGuntz (talk • contribs) 00:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC) --TheGuntz (talk) 00:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)