Talk:Murder of Jessica Lal

Current Event Template Added

I have added the current event template  Doctor Bruno  20:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

The "murder" is not a current event. But subsequent part of the article deals with the "TRIAL" The trial is at present going on with Ram Jethmalani arguing for Manu Sharma  Doctor Bruno  15:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I removed the current event template. If such a template is to be added, it should be added in Manu Sharma's article, which has many more details on this trial. mukerjee (talk) 18:11, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Unsigned

If you want to help Jessica's Soul rest in piece please visit www.justiceforjessica.com and fill out the form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.134.48.152 (talk • contribs)

This is biography article not event. Jessica Lal murder case may be the current event? Can we add this template for biography articles?Is there any precedent?

Regarding unsigned persons request..

Whether canvassing for particular cause (however good it may be) allowed in Talk section of the article?--Lravikumar 14:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Did the Delhi Police Appeal on its own?

Did the Delhi police take action on its own or did the court direct it to do so? According to my knowledge, the Delhi High Court took "suo moto cognizance" of the issue and asked Delhi Police for the details. Then the Delhi police went on to file an appeal against the acquital. See this link from The Times of India. I think this should be mentioned here as well as on Manu Sharma's page.

WP:INDIA Banner/Delhi Addition

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Delhi workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Delhi or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 03:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that is quite an appropriate Indian task force to add. I have also added task forces for Indian politics and gender. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Do you think there is a change ????

After all this do you people think there is a change in Indian Laws ????? Do you people think as a Democratic country, power is lying in the hands of People??? In India do you think people gets Justice??? there are many questions in the mind, and don't know where to search for answers ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.96.135.29 (talk) 15:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

BLP problems

This article is not in compliance with Wikipedia's policies regarding articles discussing living persons. While Lall is dead, most of the other figures in the case remain alive, and the article includes quite a few unsourced claims alleging misbehavior if not criminal conduct, as well as clearly unreferenced quotations attributed to and/or concerning living persons. These are severe problems and need to be addressed soon by persons knowledgeable in the subject area. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Double Jeopardy

How does the retrial sit with the consitutional guarantee against double jeopardy? We need someone to explain the legal procedures involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.161.190 (talk) 05:35, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Middle Finger Protest

There was a lot of over-hyped stuff about what used to be called the Middle Finger Protest & is now renamed as the Human Rights thingy. I removed it in favour of simpler phrasing a few days ago, partly because it clearly gave undue weight to the organisation.

The stuff has been coming back in the last few hours. It is not necessary. Now, if it were to be the case that something goes wrong during this latest parole then there might be a reason to show the reaction. As things stand, if the guy returns to prison when he should and with no drama then I would in fact by inclined to remove the entire 2011 parole subsection anyway - it is a normal part of legal process and not notable. - Sitush (talk) 05:39, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Its good that you've simplified the phrasing, not sure why you think it gave undue weightage to the organisation? It was the only organisation which stood up for Jessica in Chandigarh as everyone was afraid to protest against Manu Sharma in his hometown. The members of the organisation faced threats to their life because of their role in encouraging the people of Chandigarh to fight for the case. The organisations role in the case is supported by a Times of India front page news article. This news article appeared on the front page of The Times of India (in different cities) The parole edit is also supported by a news article. Manu Sharma's parole is not one of those normal parole cases. The Delhi police took a U-turn in court, they had been claiming they would oppose the parole application. There is anger amongst the people in Chandigarh over his parole. Prabhloch (talk) 010:30:00, 20 November 2011 (IST)

That makes more sense. However, if you are going to say things like this then they need to be supported otherwise there is no context & they'll most likely get deleted as trivial, irrelevant or undue weight. If not by me then by someone else. THreats to lives? Only organisation? Police u-turn? Where is the support for all of this? - Sitush (talk) 06:13, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Threat to life is mentioned in the Times of India article. The only/first organisation also becomes clear from the article. Police-uturn, just do a google search, there are plenty of news articles on this, recent one, all newspapers, news channels.

Regards (Prabhloch (talk) 06:21, 20 November 2011 (UTC))

It is not my responsibility to find this info. I'll do some digging, sure, but really it is down to you. We work as a team here, but that doesn't mean that you can offload "work" on to others. If you want to add something to an article then you should justify the reasons for doing so & respond to any reasonable queries. You'll most likely find the info quicker than me because you know what you are looking for, whereas I only have a few clues. - Sitush (talk) 10:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

The news links for Delhi Police's u-turn are: http://www.timesnow.tv/Delhi-polices-sudden-U-turn-paves-the-way-Manu-Sharmas-parole-but-does-Jessicas-killer-deserve-this/articleshow/4389125.cms and http://ibnlive.in.com/videos/202815/delhi-polices-uturn-behind-manu-sharmas-parole.html . A clear u-turn by Delhi police. Rest of the information already cited by news articles. Hope this is sufficient.

Regards (Prabhloch (talk) 13:16, 20 November 2011 (UTC))

The news link for the organisation slamming Manu Sharma's parole is : http://112.196.11.34/dailypost/Details.aspx?id=11319&boxid=55990&uid&dat=2011-11-19

Rest of the information already cited with news links. The information seems to be very relevant.

Regards Prabhloch — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabhloch (talk • contribs) 13:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, the TOI one does not support the statement (looks like dynamic content may have been moved out) and I gave up waiting for the ibnlive one to load (was taking ages and looked like it might be a video, which I cannot hear anyway). Your third reference is one that you have repeatedly inserted today and it is the one that would appear to show your conflict of interest with the Middle Finger thing (a Prabhloch is photographed). I've been polite so far, but no more. You appear to have a conflict of interest and are probably self-promoting here. This is not acceptable behaviour and your additions are undue weight. Please do not add this content again. - Sitush (talk) 17:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)