Talk:Killing of Craig DeLeeuw Robertson

Craig was LDS/Mormon. “Robertson was the financial clerk in their ward for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” From ABC4, who interviewed members of his ward.

https://www.abc4.com/news/central-utah/neighbors-speak-about-the-provo-man-killed-by-the-fbi/ 2601:8C0:A83:87F0:18E5:559D:67BA:D40B (talk) 05:29, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Associated Press says he is Mormon: https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/utah-man-suspected-threatening-president-joe-biden-shot-102143620 2601:8C0:A83:87F0:18E5:559D:67BA:D40B (talk) 05:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

As he was never arrested, stood trial or was convicted, he can only be alleged to have done what he is accused of. Dwain (talk) 19:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia is not a court of law. We include information based on what has been published in reliable sources. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were never arrested, tried, or convicted, but they are labeled as murderers just the same. We should take care to report allegations as allegations rather than fact, and there may well be things about Robertson that are unproven, but it's been widely reported that he admitted to writing some of the threatening posts and that some close to him have acknowledged the accounts/posts were his. Rockhead126 (talk) 22:51, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

First off Robertson hasn't been accused of murder, as far as I know. No investigation has been concluded, as far as I know, the FBI hasn't even told what happened apart from saying that he was killed while they tried to serve a warrant. And also, two anonymous sources, regardless of what publication is using them are not actually reliable. This article went up before a lot of the facts are actually known. So, until a lot of things occur the accusations against this man are just that. Is there a reason for such quick and shoddy scholarship for this article? Dwain (talk) 00:07, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think it may be wise to bring this to the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. Thriley (talk) 00:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I guess since he isn’t living, there isn’t as much of a major issue, but still there should be more eyes on this article. Thriley (talk) 00:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

People should read the Aaron Hernandez article. Hernandez really was a murderer, but, look how the article is written. It tells what he was accused of and what he was arrested and convicted of, it gets all the information out but in a certain way. The intro doesn't say that he was a "football player and a murderer." It states, " three seasons with the New England Patriots until his arrest and conviction for the murder of Odin Lloyd." I mean Robertson hasn't even been buried yet and some people were labeling him a "terrorist." A lot more information has to come out and investigations have to come to fruition to be completely determinative on just how to word things in my opinion. Frankly, an element of time needs to happen on this case too. Dwain (talk) 00:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

What qualifies someone as a criminal? He has never been convicted yet categorized as a criminal? Fodient (talk) 00:23, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Well, making threats against the president is a crime. So, would be making threats against the other people he is said to have threatened. But, his alleged crimes have not been adjudicated and since after the reports of neighbors and church members who knew him, he would never have been able to carry out those threats, the seriousness of the case would have been much less than it would have been if he actually had the intention or the ability to carry out what he is reported to have said. I mean you are correct, these really are only alleged crimes at this point. Dwain (talk) 00:33, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Is a person that has allegedly committed a crime enough to categorize someone as a criminal? Fodient (talk) 00:46, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

That's a good question. If I was deciding these things I'd say no. They'd have to create an Alleged Criminal category. But, I can't speak for anyone but myself. You have a good point and if no one else addresses the issue or there isn't a consensus possibly you can edit it out. Dwain (talk) 00:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Fodient You are not a criminal, at least in the USA, until conviction of a crime. There is no, "kind of a criminal", status. 47.132.127.113 (talk) 05:02, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

No. Robertson was an innocent man who was unjustly murdered by the government through the FBI. Theologism (talk) 22:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey, all. I wasn't aware that this discussion had taken place until the edit yesterday removing this article from Category:American male criminals, otherwise I would've weighed in earlier. It's an interesting debate to be had, but I would argue in favor of including the article in the category.

On the topic of guilt, the presumption of innocence is deeply baked into U.S. criminal law, and Article 11 of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares it a fundamental human right. This is no small thing, and I am not suggesting that any notable person ever accused of a crime should be categorized as a criminal, but it's important to note that the aforementioned presumption applies under the law and is inexorably tied to the concepts of legal liability and criminal justice. Had Mr. Robertson lived to make it to trial, the burden of proof (often "beyond a reasonable doubt") would be on the state because of the severity of criminal penalties, which do things like depriving criminal defendants of their freedom (probation, imprisonment) – or their lives – against their will. Wikipedia is not a court of law: we publish information supported by reliable sources. Marvin Heemeyer and Seung-Hui Cho, to name two examples, are not termed "alleged" criminals, even though their crimes were never adjudicated in a court of law. If, looking at all reliable sources available, there's substantial doubt about the truth of a particular allegation (or there are alternate theories that are notable but not necessarily true: see Lee Harvey Oswald), that can (and sometimes should) be accounted for in the article.

On the topic of semantics, there is no universally accepted definition for the noun "criminal", even in the legal space, much less in the sociocultural space. Is a criminal one who commits a crime? One who has been found guilty of a crime in a court of law? What if someone committed an act that could be categorized as criminal, but the adjudicating authority convicted them in a way that could be considered unfair or unjust? What if you had an O. J. Simpson-type situation where someone is found to be not criminally liable under a particular criminal statute but is found to be civilly liable for the unlawful act that gave rise to the earlier criminal trial? What about someone is found guilty of a crime in a court of law but new evidence emerged later, proving they couldn't've committed the crime? If such a thing happened, would a formal exculpation be needed to say the person's not a criminal? The point I'm trying to make here is that there's no shortage of possibilities here, so I would argue for a rather broad definition as far as the Wikipedia category is concerned, absent the creation of a more specific category.

To tie all of this together, while Mr. Robertson was not tried/found formally criminally liable for making the threats alleged and some who knew him have raised questions about whether or not he was capable of actually carrying out such threats, it seems to me that there are objective, reliable sources supporting the assertion that he committed all the elements of the federal crimes he was charged with. I don't see any raising serious doubts that the social media profiles involved didn't belong to him or that the confession detailed in the criminal complaint was misrepresented. Rockhead126 (talk) 20:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

The only reason Robertson is notable is because he was killed by the FBI. Hundreds of people have made similar threats that don't carry them out and get in trouble for which there is no Wikipedia article on and frankly for which we have never heard of. I further question that there should even be an article especially after I did some research here and it appears that the a much more notorious individual James Hodgkinson who was responsible for the Congressional baseball shooting in 2017 has no article specifically on him. If this is the case where he is only mentioned in relation the to article specifically on the shooting, then possibly Robertson should only be a footnote on a page regarding presidential threats if such a page even exists. Otherwise, I don't see why Robertson who clearly after reports could never carry out any of his threats deserves a Wikipedia article. Dwain (talk) 13:54, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

>"The only reason Robertson is notable is because he was killed by the FBI."

Correct.

Maybe we should consider renaming this page to "Killing of Craig DeLeeuw Robertson" similar to the existing "Killing of Breonna Taylor" page. However, there is merit to having a page for the person itself, where context is provided about that person's background not provided in the "Killing" page. Ruth545 (talk) 22:35, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Agree Per WP:NBIO I don't see how this subject is notable. I think Robertson falls under WP:SINGLEEVENT and does not justify a dedicated article. We don't have an article for every person who was killed during the serving of a warrant (absent some other cause for notability). Robertson is the only person in List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States, August 2023 who has their own article. It is unclear why. Hemmers (talk) 08:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

How is Craig Robertson more notable and deserving of an entry than James Hodgkinson? His alleged crimes don't even come close? There is absolutely no justification for this article if there isn't a specific article on Hodgkinson. This should eventually be put up for deletion. Dwain (talk) 16:59, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand your complaint here. Why can't you make an entry for James Hodgkinson? Do you want help? Maybe we could make a list and add them both?

This article clearly has lots of user interest given social media discussions about it and it making national headlines for multiple days. Additionally having a reference-based entry like this could help mitigate misinformation in online circles. It's not unreasonable for someone to read one of those articles or tweets and wish to see a fuller picture in this encyclopedia, right? Ruth545 (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

His killing is notable. I agree with renaming to Killing of Craig DeLeeuw Robertson.Fodient (talk) 20:35, 14 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

This man was no political activist. He was a mentally ill man who was a victim of far right propaganda and literally BECAME far right propaganda. What was he an activist and advocate for the "right to make assassination threats" indefinitely? That's not a protected right. Why don't go edit members of Osama Bin-Laden's network on Wikipedia and insist they were "political activists." This man was no more than an idiot who comitted suicide by cop. 174.240.66.75 (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I agree that he should not be categorized as an activist with no reliable sources saying so, and I removed those categories. Jade Ten (talk) 04:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I agree that he is not an political activist. Also there's no reliable sources stating he was mentally ill.Fodient (talk) 19:18, 14 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was called an “austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State" by in institution that is considered reliable. 2600:1700:2781:3080:D424:D786:FECB:B0E6 (talk) 00:50, 18 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Since it has been decided, apparently that threats and would-be assassins are notable, I have started an article on Tracy Marie Fiorenza who was was arrested for threatening to kill a former president and his child. The draft is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tracy_Marie_Fiorenza Dwain (talk) 20:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Just as I thought! The only reason there is an article about Robertson is because he was a Republican who threatened Biden. An article on a Left-winger who threatened to assassinate Trump and his son Barron has already been deleted. If Wikipedia wants to show itself as unbiased, maybe it doesn't, then this article on Robertson should be deleted because he and even his death do not fall under notability unless there is going to be a major section criticizing the FBI and how they forced the outcome. Wikipedpia can't have it both ways. Either both Robertson for threatening to kill all these Democrats and Fiorenza who was arrested for being a would-be assassin of a child of a former president, are both notable and worthy of articles or they both aren't. One is from the Right and one is from the Left. It's pretty sickening if only the one from the Right is going to be written about while the one from the Left is swept under the carpet. Dwain (talk) 23:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Tracy Marie Fiorenza wasn't killed by police. 2800:21E2:1000:DA9:A58E:CD68:5F69:1753 (talk) 04:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply