Comments:65-year-old woman arrested over the death of two Mexican wrestlers

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

Unusual title

Shouldn't it be "murder of two Mexican wrestlers" or at least "killing of two Mexican wrestlers?" The current language is so passive and generic that one would think the cause inconclusive. From the story itself it is evident that this was murder. Why do we judiciously refrain from using any language that might be conceived of as harsh or possibly condemnatory of intensionally causing the death of these individuals? Is it because the deceased were midgets? Is it because the suspected perpetrator is elderly or female? These possible explanations are possibly too conspiratorial to be believed, but the title is such that it raises the question. 209.30.170.213 (talk) 05:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

My decision to leave the title as-is when reviewed was based on the fact that prosecutors don't believe they were trying to kill them. Under most jurisdictions, what was done to them would still warrant a murder charge but it's going to be borderline what to go for even from the prosecution's point of view; hence, death. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 10:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

It would still be killing, even if it weren't murder. You seem to think this is a case for the felony murder rule, but it doesn't require that principle, which is not entirely universal. This is more so a manifestation of the criminal law version of the "eggshell skull rule." This is not a borderline case. It would be considered murder in practically every jurisdiction. It's like a robber shooting someone in the thigh and that person dying of a complication from the gunshot injury. Borderline cases typically involve some unforeseen consequence of the criminal conduct causing someone to be killed, not the damage to the victim merely being greater than the perpetrator might have anticipated. 209.30.170.213 (talk) 19:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

"You seem to think this is a case for the felony murder rule" Eh... Felony? You have them in America, right? What's wrong with 'death'? Killing would have been just as acceptable - no-one disputes they were killed, and by a third party at that - but I remain unconvinced it would be any better. It's just a headline, not a full story. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 19:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

That was exactly my point: that the felony murder rule, a principle of U.S. law, is not necessary to conclude this is murder. That conclusion can be reached by application of more generic legal principles. Perhaps you didn't actually read what I wrote but just jumped to a conclusion. 209.30.170.213 (talk) 20:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

"That was exactly my point". I doubt my point was yours; read it again. "Perhaps you didn't actually read what I wrote but just jumped to a conclusion." Ah, the irony. My point was that I don't give a stuff how the states runs it. If we had a contributor who I trusted to get things right in Mexico, I might have asked him/her. We don't, so I didn't. If I had an hour or three to spare on such a trivial issue I might have found and read the relevant legialation; again, I can think of better uses Wikinews might have for such a length of time. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 19:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

My point is that I'm not talking about how the states runs it. How has this managed to elude you? There you go treating an open project as a private clique with tiers of editors some of whom are more worthy of your "trust" than others. I've seen you espouse the same attitude on English Wikipedia, and it's quite nauseating. I don't think your time is really all that important. The "my-time-is-oh-so-important" defense is favored heavily by narcissists such as yourself. 209.30.177.37 (talk) 22:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

You also seem to be treating this as some kind of policy debate, whereas it's actually my opinion on the appropriateness of the title, which I duly categorized under the "opinions" page. Your evidentiary standards arguments are quite misplaced. I'm not interested in how you and the other editors came up with a bad title, I'm just voicing my opinion that it's a bad one. 209.30.177.37 (talk) 22:29, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

If you weren't taling about the states then why bring up felony murders? They are only relevant in countries that have them; if Mexico has them I will humbly apoligise but the only country I can think of with felonies is the US. I hardly brought up a "private clique with tiers of editors"; I did indicate that we have no-one who claims to have any knowledge of Mexican law (unless they have been inactive for a year or two, but I don't recall anyone). I am not trying to bring up policy - because we were in the pinions page I carefuly avoided trying to cite any to back up my opinions - I am giving my opinion why I feel the policy is reasonable, and linking that back to my thoughts at the time. I DID NOT claim that my time is important, nor do I take the view that it is important. It isn't IMO. I did take the view that writing several stories - as I can do in 2-3 hours - would be a better - merely better, note, not amazingly wonderfuly beneficial to the whole of hmankind - than trying to become confident ebough with the law of Mexico to to say "murder". I will join you in being horrified if a murder charge is not brought, but that is as far as I can go. What started here as a reasonable discussion between two people of different views (the question of if we know enough to call it a murder) has degenerated into this, which is quite sad really. Bleh, I could probably have written that in a way that didn't have quite as many emphasised words and dashes, but oh well, I daresay it's understandandable, which will do on this page. To come back to "trust", we are a small enough project that we can employ a touch of that and it is not as closed as you seem to believe. Contribute here and it is quickly extended to anyone with the only requirement that people keep on trying to be helpful. Editor staus is open to anyone who can show they know their way around, and that trusts yu with the entire project's reputation since it would allow you to stick any old crap onto Google News. Why not try writing? This place provides a pretty good escape from the en.wp issues you accuse me of having. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)