Comments:Former Chief Operating Officer of Wikimedia Foundation is convicted felon

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

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

Regardless of what the truth is in this case: how is it possible in America that anyone could be a felon, a repeated drunk driver, kill someone in a hit-and-run drunk driving "accident", and still get out of jail in well under a year? People who were caught in 2005 sending spam E-mails or blowing up mailboxes with fireworks or carrying a Ziploc bag full of marijuana are still just starting their prison time. But all the winds of compassion seem to blow for the terrorists of the roadway. Do people realize that if just the Muslims in this country - 1% of drivers - decided not to drink and drive on account of their religion, that has saved as many lives in 20 years as were lost in the September 11th attacks? Mike Serfas 18:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Mike, Unfortunately it's fairly common in many states that DUI fatalities are considered something like involuntary manslaughter. And, if there is any jail time it's minimal. --Sue Anne —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Oy yoi yoiEdit

Jimbo is really fielding some heat on this. It is hard to defend a drunk driver, but it sure must suck to have the Wiki community go after her so hardcore. --David Shankbone 18:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

This isn't just about drunk driving. She also shot a boyfriend and engaged in check fraud. JoshuaZ 18:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Oy yoi yoi. --David Shankbone 18:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
And if you want to get suspicious, she could have killed her husband. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 22:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Oy ya yoi ya yoi!!! --David Shankbone 23:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


At first I thought it must be a hoax. How many people have:

  • Four convictions for driving under the influence;
  • Two convictions for check fraud and petty larceny;
  • A conviction for hit and run with a fatality;
  • Been charged with unlawful wounding for shooting a friend;
  • Been charged with driving while a license is suspended or revoked;
  • Had a spouse of five days drown on their honeymoon;
  • Filed for bankruptcy; and
  • Faced arrest under a "nationwide extradition"warrant.

But I suppose it could also apply to many celebrities! Jcart1534 00:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, it definitely begs the question "How was she hired?" Whose decision was it to hire her in the first place, who voted for her hire, and why, despite her extensive criminal background (which multiple people found simply by Googling her different names in certain spots)? TheCustomOfLife 00:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Just what I was about to ask. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 00:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
It appears she was hired through an agency. JoshuaZ 01:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
It's still the Foundation's fault for not researching her background when they hired her for the COO job. As much as people like to think it rules everything, usually when applying for such a job, nobody just "assumes good faith." TheCustomOfLife 01:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Mike, I agree 100%. FellowWiki Newsie 01:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Usually, I read people complaining that employers are too picky about criminal records and refusing to hire ex-cons, effectively trapping people in a life of crime. But then when something like this happens, people are all "how could you possibly have hired that person". Does anyone else notice this duality in public opinion? --SVTCobra 01:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I'm not as much shocked that they hired her, I'm shocked they had no knowledge of her record. Bawolff 01:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I understand, but I think usually the split happens with certain levels at certain companies. This would be an acceptable duality, because a woman who had multiple legal issues with money, and nearly countless other troubles, should not be anywhere near accounting at any company, much less WMF. TheCustomOfLife 01:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I was commenting more in general, than to this specific case. Also, wasn't this woman the COO and not CFO? I think the Register was deliberately trying to paint her as the person in control of the monies. --SVTCobra 01:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
For a lot of her time there, she was the highest person doing day to day work in the office. So they actually were pretty right on. TheCustomOfLife 01:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Point is...this is not something that is a parking ticket or maybe forgot to pay for a candy bar. This is what appears to be a 5 state crime spree. She is a con artist. Very knowledgeable...and all this was found just by simple searches. One might wonder...did she swander WMF? DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:15, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

What a terrible article, sensationalist in the worst possible way. when you look at the facts rather than the way the story is written, what do you really have? that she had a friend who had a conviction overturned for murder. that she apparently shot her boyfriend and subsequently he offered to marry her. The worst one has to be the suggestion that she maybe killed her first husband who drowned after only 5 days of marriage. Was there ever a hint of accusation by the police that she somehow killed him. That was shameful reporting.

What her record really comes down to is being caught driving under the influence four times. Yes someone got killed one of those times, what was her part in the death? we don't know automatically she gets blamed since she was over the limit had she came from a bar or was she going out to work the next day after a night out? Theres the petty larceny charge which may be as simple as a bounced cheque, again we don't know the circumstances. The only hint we get is that at the 'boyfriend' shooting incident she had a 3 year old son. Perhaps she was struggling as a single mother at the time and didnt realise the state of her bank account.

She is not blameless but she isn't Rose West either.

There are doctors, lawyers and accountants that drink most of them don't get behind the wheel of a car whilst drunk but it doesn't make them unfit to do their jobs.

Please rewrite the article with some objectivity at least drop the reference to her husbands accidental death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

She was convicted on Manslaughter instead of attempted murder. What the article shows, that even without the tools of a professional background check, and by using nothing more than Google and such, we came up with all this. We didn't have to call people, or pay for stuff. This woman has a 5-6 state crime spree, filed for bankruptcy because she owed about 300 different companies thousands of dollars, killed someone because she cannot say when enough is enough, had a friend who managed to kill someone....over drugs...the larceny is for the con artist she has been. And its not often someone gets a nation extradition warrant out for their arrest........all that...with google, and she managed to get a position of COO for the internet's fastest growing information source EVER, AND was in charge of an ENTIRE lets list the convicted crimes:
  1. Stealing
  2. Manslaughter
  3. Fraud
  4. Hit and run with a fatality
  5. 4 DUI's, and that's just in Florida
  6. Violation of parole
  7. Conspiracy to commit murder
  8. Possession of a controlled substance
  9. Assault with a deadly weapon

All this just from a simple google search...and yet she managed to get a respectable job, where she was in charge of just about everything in the office, and had the potential to embezzle and steal thousands from tell me where there is not a story? DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

"Con-artist" -- that would explain quite a bit about this bizarre story. All of those convictions clearly argue that she was not a person who happened to run into a patch of bad luck, & somehow she managed to bluff her way into letting a temp agency into doing only the most cursory of background checks. (In her email to WikiEN-L, Florence Devouard stated that they did talk to her previous employers, which included the agency who placed Doran to begin with, & none of whom mentioned her arrest record. They had the resources to uncover this record, unlike WMF.) And it also explains the mysterious silence around her departure: either the staff at the Foundation learned the truth &, like most victims of con-artists, were so embarrassed that they wanted to hide their mistake, or Doran knew the importance of keeping her departure below the radar & pressured the WMF to keep the facts confidential. It would also explain why Doran hasn't bothered to update her LinkedIn profile. -- llywrch 08:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

86.22... The drunk driving wouldn't be so bad if she weren't such a recidivist compounded by the financial offences. Her fatal hit and run was a while ago, yet she was arrested just on May 20 of this year (!) for her third (meaning she's had at least one since then) DUI. (and no llywrch, I did not follow you here ;)). — Yom 08:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The shooting incidentEdit

" On Tuesday, [Philip L. Brown]'s letter to the prosecutor was entered into evidence in Fairfax Circuit Court, and the charge against [Carolyn Bothwell] was reduced to unlawful wounding. The prosecution recommended probation instead of jail. Bothwell, whose attorney told the judge the shooting was in self-defense, pleaded guilty to the lesser charge, saying she feared losing custody of her son. Sentencing is scheduled for April 20.

In January 1989, eight months before the shooting, Brown was charged with assault after he allegedly threw Bothwell down a flight of concrete stairs and and kicked her in the ribs, according to court records. Brown, who was cleared of the charge, says he did not beat Bothwell.

"Carolyn Bothwell was not a victim of someone who used to beat her," Brown, a consultant to a defense contractor, said yesterday. "I did slap Carolyn. But I was attacked first. "

Looks like its domestic violence to me- 18 years ago... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

On wikimedia handling thisEdit

I think the wmf did a pretty good job handling this. Lots of people on foundation-l are saying they should of broke the story before the register did, but I think they did the right thing. So far we are the only people who picked up on this, if the wmf released a press release, all that would of served was to attract attention to this issue. Bawolff 09:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe...but I mean this was bound to be made public. I guess i can say good job for not denying least I hope that's not what they are doing. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

There is no case that exists in Maryland for Carolyn Bothwell or Carolyn Doran. Clearly the information is not accurate. This includes all searches for civil, criminal, traffic or civil citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

many errorsEdit

This article has several problems, to start with her name is carolyn annette bothwell doran, not carolyn sue. This is typical of carolyn,I know all the truth. My name is philip brown, father of her son and the man she shot in 1989. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Get her out fast....

Unless Wikipedia wants to pay fines like Y! G and MS for "promoting" illegal activities.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)

Uh, read the date? This was last December, not 2008. --Brian McNeil / talk 16:07, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The cool part of this crazy story is the link to Betancourt-a crazy case that is now huge precedent in Virginia.