Talk:Richardson family murders

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
  • This article was undeleted at deletion review: [1] --W.marsh 20:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Decaying Sorrow

Decaying Sorrow at Vampire Freaks is not Jeremy Steinke, but a friend of his, and member of the band Steinke was in. His name is Grant, and some reports say he is Steinke's cousin. 4.252.73.215 15:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)OptyMyst

I removed the link. Feel free to add/remove things from the page yourself, if you know of corrections needed/warranted. --Yank4323 15:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] YCJA

Wikipedia is committing a criminal offence under Canadian law by publishing the fact that the young person is suspected of, charged with and arrested for an offence. You should probably delete references to the allegation right away. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.149.207.90 (talk • contribs) 06:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

WP is hosted in the United States, which means it follows their laws. There is nothing wrong with this page (legally)--speaking as a Canadian myself. :: Colin Keigher 21:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the original statement. The YCJA is being wrongly construed here. While it is a crime to openly out such a person (a youth accused of a crime), the YCJA does NOT require you to be absolutely stupid. It mostly applies to official documents and media outlets, as well as those who are directly related to the incident. Utilization of deductive reasoning to work out who is a murderer (and thus avoid such a person, for instance), isn't punishable. Indeed, it would be quite a leap for the Canadian court system if they were to try and hold someone who -has no good reason to know- something, accountable. If charged with wrongly outing the murderess, one could simply say: "Prove I know it for a fact. Prove I wasn't just shooting my mouth off." Because unless you WERE told by someone reliable, or DID witness the murders, we don't actually KNOW. Putting the name of someone into Wikipedia, if it's verifiable, and doesn't countermand US laws, is perfectly fine. So too would it be fine for me to posit that I believe she did it. This is Canada. If the government really didn't want me to know what everyone else knows, they would have banned news broadcasts and publications from outside of Canada. I doubt that will happen. This case has in fact received national attention and caused Canadians to reconsider the YCJA. 71.7.206.159 (talk) 16:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess the relevant question, then, is whether Wikipedia is a media outlet.
By the way, it looks to me like the YCJA is worded to forbid "any person" in Canada from publishing the names of young offenders as defined in the Act. I'm in the clear, since neither Wikipedia nor this article is aimed at Canadians, I'm not Canadian, and I do not edit this article from Canada, visit it from Canada, or send anybody a link to it when they or I am in Canada, and I do not mention, via e-mail or instant message, specifics about this case to people who are in Canada.
If the government tried to make the argument that its laws applied outside its own borders, it would surely be displeased by the result. dcandeto (talk) 03:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Murderer's name & picture should be public knowledge

Damn right people should know who killed the family. I've already posted the following discussion under the link to Jasmine's photo:

Thanks for showing this murderer's name & picture. Every news outlet in Canada is suppressing the information, although everyone knows it was the daughter (Jasmine) who killed the family. It is a shame that you can kill your entire family and have your identity kept hidden simply because you are under the age of 18. Even worse, I suppose, is the fact she will get a maximum of 10 years in prison and only have to serve 6 years at most. Gotta love our Justice system. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.73.219.237 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Legality

The Wikipedia disclaimer states, "Wikipedia does not encourage the violation of any laws." Therefore, as one of the accused is a minor, that person's name should be removed. Hoshq 20:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not illegal for Wikipedia to mention the names of minors accused of crimes, and mentioning Jasmine Richardson as the accused breaks no applicable laws. dcandeto 22:30, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
You may be correct, given that Wikipedia is hosted in the United States, but Canadian contributors may want to familiarize themselves with sections 110, 111, and 138 of Canada's Youth Criminal Justice Act. Loremipsum 02:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why I have no plans to edit or even view this article while I'm visiting Canada. I also don't say anything about this article to people who I know are in Canada. Since none of my traffic even leaves the U.S., my edits aren't subject to Canadian law. I do find it interesting that Global National has been identifying the Richardsons as the victims, and then going on to say that the Youth Criminal Justice Act prohibits them from mentioning any relationship between the victims and the accused (often with a smirk from Kevin Newman), and also mentioning that Jeremy Steinke is the boyfriend of the accused, while most media outlets have been mentioning that the girl was accused of killing her parents and brother, and that Jeremy Steinke is the boyfriend of the accused. And then there's this article, which identifies the accused by her initials. It seems to me that any Canadian who gets news from multiple sources would be able to draw the obvious conclusions, and could fill in the blanks on just about everything but the last six letters of "J.R.'s" first name. But I digress. dcandeto 09:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems likely that it would be illegal for any Canadian editor to make any edit to the main page, unless it includes removing the girl's name. How about someone (not in Canada) adding a warning? I can't do it, for pretty obvious reasons. Meters 23:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I feel like I'm going to be in trouble just for knowing this kind of thing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by The hoodie (talk • contribs) 06:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
In fact, the accused's name was widely published prior to her arrest, as was her picture. In Canadian news articles. --Yamla 15:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes she was identified, but as the article says, that information was suppressed once she became a suspect. As silly as it may be, it is probably illegal to edit the main article from Canada. Meters (talk) 22:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sentencing

It looks like she's going to be sentenced today. dcandeto 14:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)