Talk:Murder of Lindsay Hawker/Archive 1

Archive 1

Why?

The person who placed the tag on the article needs to explain why s/he believes the article should be deleted. Exploding Boy 06:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes i know it seems strange. But their is always editor kings here who thinks their opinion ar ethe only who matter. --Matrix17 10:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Family opinion

A family expressing devastation at the death of a young woman is not really that notable at all. Sorry. This is being objective. Being subjective would to give undue weight to this statement. That said, second wording was better. Matrix17, please do not take actions of other editors personally.--ZayZayEM 10:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

agreed Sparkzilla 10:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Like you do you mean? defending your opinion here isnt exactly what a talk page is for.Personal attacks on other people isnt whats it for anyway.Keep that in mind.--Matrix17 10:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Obvious reactions by next of kin or close family is certainly not notable or encyclopedic. ZayZayEM didn't defend his opinion as such, just stating that the quality needs to be maintained in shorter and swiftly developing articles as this, as well. Where's the personal attack, did I miss something? --Strangnet 10:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Good editing on the page anyway stranget ,even do you always have the same sarcastic way.Not good for an editor.That Zayzayman removed important external links seems to just have passed you by.:)--Matrix17 10:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Matrix17, assume good faith and stop being so hostile. Mackan 18:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Dont tell me that i can see on your talk page that you arent exactly a role model in the thin you just wrote mackan--Matrix17 20:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiJapan?

Is there any news from wiki in japan? 58.187.21.76 12:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Appears not. Maybe its a bit controversial to supply details about ongoing cases--ZayZayEM 02:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It is there now. Anyway, there is a policy in Japanese wikipedia to not rash to make an ongoing case a wiki-article unless at the very least the suspect had been caught or likely to be, and is waiting for a trial. It probably seems too strict compared to English wikipedia, but there had been a string of law cases against media where the suspect's life was completely reported, then it turned out that he was an innocent person. In these cases, the compensation won were huge even for an average working person and there is a good chance that if wikipedia was accused, it will lose. So a caution is observed.

Also, controversal cases are so few each year that it is actually feasible (editing wise, only like few thousands/year) to record all murder, rape, and armed robbery cases that occurred in Japan. This, however, would make Japanese wikipedia a crime encyclopedia, which is not the aim of wikipedia project.--Revth 08:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Please note that Wikis cannot be used as sources in Wikipedia. Sparkzilla 06:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Awkward

Hawker's naked body was found buried in a sand-filled bathtub on the apartment's balcony...

It says "the apartment" before any description is given, and before Ichihashi is even mentioned. The whole section needs to be reordered to make proper sense.

Done Sparkzilla 05:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, the Chiba police source has a description of Ishihashi, could it be of any use?

Approximately 180cm tall

Slim build

Slender face

Medium length hair [black is implied, though not explicit]

It pretty much describes any tall Japanese person, but at least it's all reliable information, and there's no picture. 125.205.59.205 05:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the description is useful as it describes most of the Japanese population ;) BTW, a picture of the suspect Ichihashi was released by police. Sparkzilla 05:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

A copy of the picture is available here. I'm not sure how to write a fair use rationale for it, though, so I'll leave it to someone else if they think it's worth including. JulesH 08:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Private student

The suspect was a private student of the victim. This was widely reported in the Japanese media. He somehow lured her from the cafe where they met to his apartment (Japanese police discovered a video of them in the cafe, and stills were shown in the Japanese media). One guess is that she was looking for an apartment, and he might have offered to rent his condo to her. I added the info about the student/teacher relationship to the article some time ago, but someone deleted it. Don't you think the fact that they had a student/teacher relationship is important for people trying to understand this crime? Here is a link to a typical article: [1]

• Use sources and put it back in--ZayZayEM 05:05, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Wanted poster

It looks like a photoshop hackjob by activist group www.lindsayhawker.com . It is not an official poster (in the sense of being made by any law enforcement agency or governmental agency).

Is it an appropriate image to use on this page? Does it add to understanding of the issue? Is it spam?

I am also rather skeptical of its classification of fair-use for non-free images.--ZayZayEM (talk) 16:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Questions for clarification

It says her body was completely naked. The one thing that comes to mind at this point is that the Japanese have at least in many things that I have read have always been so adverse to sex crimes (not saying this was one). Even deviants/criminals have mostly stayed away from that kind of M.O. Is this a sign of a flux in that kind of mindset. Also, someone let me know if they have read similar things please Amaraiel 06:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you asking if it's unusual to have a sex crime in Japan?--ZayZayEM 15:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

So far as I have heard it is. (Time Out Tokyo by TimeOut) --Amaraiel 15:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't have that book. But from personal experience, anectdotal evidence, watching Japanese news, and I'm happy to ass-u-me that statistics will back me up that Japanese sex crimes are not a rare occurance. Japanese board of tourism is a pretty successful at it's job. I wish I could say the same for the police (joking, don't hurt me).--ZayZayEM 14:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW my personal experience pertains to stories/news of paedophile-murder-abductions, "coercision" by pop stars, teachers and *sempai*; co-worker's experiencing pretty rampant [sexual harassment seku-hara], including strange old guys groping them in shopping aisles. I think Japanese fiction (manga, soaps, sit-coms and oprah-style shows really show how lax attitudes to things such as *coercion* and sexual assault/harassment is in Japan ::: thankfully outrage at the killing of kids exists - though Japan likes to blame it on foreign elements).--ZayZayEM 14:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

In the interests of using a reliable source [2]

For every one woman who comes out of Tokyo hostess work with an understandably jaundiced view of her customers, those intrepid reporters could find 50 to tell them that Japan's urban streets are by some margin safer than most of the cities from where they were dispatched. There are just 1.75 reported rapes per 100,000 people in Japan compared to 16.50 in the U.K. and 31.77 in the U.S. Statistics for gun crimes, murder and serious assault in Japan are well below rates in other industrialized nations. The most shocking crimes here take place not between strangers, but among families.

Sex crime per-person appears rarer in Japan than in UK/US, but I don't think tabloids are running short of anything to print.--ZayZayEM (talk) 23:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

David McNeill / Japan Times article

I have removed the weasel words used in the original sentence to imply that McNeill's view represents some kind of consensus (of which I see no evidence). I don't personally think he argues his case very convincingly anyway, and his tone slips into the sort of Tabloid partisanship that he decries; I suppose the Japan Times constitutes a respectable source though. Gunstar hero (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Deleted reference to Tatsuya Ichihashi being Korean-Japanese

Deleted the passage that claims that Tatsuya Ichihashi is an ethnic Korean living in Japan. The person did not provide a source nor is there any information or evidence on the net to prove he is an ethnic Korean. Personal prejudice, racial scape goating and racism does not equal evidence.

I would appreciate the person who keeps editing his nationality to stop it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PikeMyson (talk • contribs) 05:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Most likely right-wing Japanese nationalists. I just had to revert another edit with grammatical errors and a link that talked about Japanese nationalist blogs trying to call him Zainichi used as "proof" that he is. Neoyamaneko (talk) 04:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

POV - Article naming

She didn't die naturally or voluntarily; that's murder. And discuss your wishes before you make such a controversial page move. You're the only one disputing that it is murder. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 01:30, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand what murder means. Nobody says she died naturally or voluntarily. It could have been an unlawlful killing or an accedent, or what not. It is not (yet) known. A court normally pronounces murder, not a newspaper editor. Mootros (talk) 12:44, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand what controversial page move means. Hawker's naked body was found buried in a sand/soil-filled bathtub on the apartment's balcony. She had been bound and gagged with plastic ties and scarves, with one of her hands lying outside the mixture. Both Hawker and Ichihashi were familiar with martial arts (Ichihashi was much more experienced, having attained a black belt), and it appeared, from the bruises that were present across Hawker's upper body, that she had been the subject of a prolonged attack—her possessions were found strewn across the room as well. Police said that the egg-sized bruises on the left side of her face appeared to have been inflicted with a fist, while lesser marks on her upper body were the result of collision with furniture. Hawker had died when her assailant began strangling her, and broke the cartilage of her neck. Her head was then shaved after she was killed. Stop splitting hairs, and don't move this article again without some sort of consensus. Other articles on similar topics are similarly named. We can bring in an admin if you like. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 13:21, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Where does it say murder? Anywhere, Sir/Madam? Mootros (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that a better title is "Death of Lindsay Hawker", until a court finds someone guilty of murder. Cla68 (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

A bit of an outside opinion (warning, long): I've just seen a pointer to this discussion from elsewhere, and upon review of the article and discussion, my opinion is that Death of Lindsay Hawker is the better title. With so much of the article being a discussion of Ichihashi, it's important to remember that we aren't the posse comitatus or Guardian Angels], but only an encyclopedia, and we should have a neutral poit of view, not a "Justice for Lindsay!" point of view. It's perfectly reasonable for the article text to say what's obvious - she died at someone's hands, Ichihashi immediately fled, and he hasn't surfaced for two years. It's not reasonable for the article title - the most valuable real estate in the entire article - to convict him of murder before the reader even reaches the lead sentence.

To answer the most obvious response to the above: yes, it is perfectly clear that someone killed Lindsay Hawker, so one could argue that "murder" is an abstract statement rather than an accusation against Ichihashi. However, the article discusses only Ichihashi, for very good reasons - to wit, despite what I've said above, he probably is responsible. Consequently, that "murder" in the article title is pointed at him. Moreover, importantly, there is no requirement that the article title must say murder; any reader will soon see that she was murdered. Death of Lindsay Hawker solves some problems, and doesn't actually weaken the article; it's the better choice. — Gavia immer (talk) 15:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The Japanese police placed Ichihashi on a nationwide wanted list for murder and abandonment of a body on March 27, 2007. The official name of the case is 市川市福栄における英国人女性殺人・死体遺棄事件/the case of murder and abandonment of the body of an British woman at Fukuei, Ichikawa city. [3], [4] and [5]. Oda Mari (talk) 15:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. I'm not claiming that he didn't do it (the conclusion seems obvious), or even that he wouldn't be convicted if apprehended (again, it seems obvious), only that in the absence of a criminal conviction, we should not be convicting Ichihashi in the article title. Supposing there was no suspect, I would have no problem with describing Lindsay Hawker's death as murder in the title; because of the circumstances surrounding the suspect, I do see a problem with it. That isn't an attempt to favor Ichihashi; it's an attempt to be as neutral as possible. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Gavia immer: until/unless Ichihashi is actually convicted of the murder (whether in person or in absentia), the Death of Lindsay Hawker is the best title of this article. Wikipedia can only report what has already been reported elsewhere, and we must maintain a neutral point of view. "Death of Lindsay Hawker " accomplishes both of those. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. If and only if a ruling of murder is found to have occurred can this be called a murder. Until then, the only reliably verifiable information regards a death; anything else would be not only synthesis, but something altogether different legally. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Disagree. Her death is described in reliable sources as having been murdered. Unless there are reports in reliable sources of a disagreement as to the circumstances of her death and attributable to something other than murder, we need to stick with what the sources do say. I noticed that while the name of the article changed, the instances of the word murder in the text have not been, and should not be, if an editor is interested in article maintaining accuracy to the sourced material. As reported, Ichihasi is a suspect in the murder of Lindsey Hawker. Statisticalregression (talk) 06:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Which sources are your referring to here? Mootros (talk) 08:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

<-- The BBC for one sir, please take the time to look at sources that are actually an article you intend to edit. Secondly, would you care to elaborate on the difference between being killed and being murdered and why you feel this almost indiscernible shade of gray between the two is important enough to delineate despite how RS are covering the event? I understand that there are some concerned editors here that are acting in very good faith by trying to promote NPOV and a neutral tone but I think there is a huge disconnect what you might think is NPOV and what WP has to say on the matter. The article needs to reflect the sources. I knew when I mentioned that no one had changed the use of the word murder in the actual article that some cowboy would take me up on it. Mootros, in the new material that you introduced why did you write that she is "believed to be murdered" when there is no source that indicates any question of manner of her demise? "believed to be murdered...by who? please attempt to finish that line. The subscript of the Times article headline reads:

This man’s 22-year-old daughter was killed in a Tokyo apartment. The police were standing outside the door when her killer came out. Yet he is still free 20 months later. David James Smith investigates the body-in-the-bath murder of Lindsay Hawker

As the text of this wiki article now stands, it is not congruent to the sources. Guys (gals) please take a moment to read WP:NPOV carefully. It says "Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves" if you are of the opinion that she was killed, but possibly not murdered, you are drawing a distinction that doesn't exists in any of the sources referred to in the article, and quite literally wielding your (good intentioned) opinion around like a golf club inside a clubhouse.Statisticalregression (talk) 01:52, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Statisticalregression, thank you kindly for your continuing interest in the article.

1. Difference between murder and killing. These are not shades of grey; these are different classes of issues. Killing is a term that merely refers to an action (i.e. causing death). It is neutral about the intent of the action (i.e. why was this done). Murder means the action of killing with the intent of killing. Example: A meets B, booth agree to do c. In the course of doing c, A gets angry because s/he thinks c should be done differently and loses the plot and causes the death of B. That's not murder. There was no premeditation, there was no plan to do that, there was only an affect for instance. Whereas A goes to meet B in order to kill B (pretending to do c), that could be understood as murder. In sum, killing just means causing death regardless of someone's intention, which could include even an accident.

2. So why not murder at this stage? It would be hard to make a case, if it is not even properly known who caused the death to speculated about what the person intended to do.

3. Who believes it was murder? Lindsay Hawker's father see here and some journalists (who have spoken to her father). There are also formal suspicions by the police that this may have been a murder. All this is perfectly valid and it is also correct to state in an wikipedia article that there these opinions and suspicions. Yet, I think a fact whether or not it was murder is normally pronounced by a court of law.

Hope this makes sense. Yours, Mootros (talk) 17:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, Ichihashi has indeed been charged with murder by the police, putting an end to the debate. Neoyamaneko (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Until he is convicted, no murder has been established in a court of law. "Death of..." is still a more NPOV title. Cla68 (talk) 23:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure the police forensics and a coroner's inquest (coroners determine homicides and not courts, BTW) have already established it to be murder, otherwise they wouldn't issue a warrant on it. Even if Ichihashi didn't do it, the injuries to her neck are consistent and can only be caused by manual strangulation. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. The court didn't convict O.J. Simpson of murder, but it doesn't mean that the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman weren't murders.Neoyamaneko (talk) 23:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The title remains highly controversial. The suspect stated that he did not intend to kill the person, so how could this be murder? It is for a court to decided not for newspaper or editors whether it was murder. Mootros (talk) 08:35, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Unintended results / unintentional homicide ( please see Depraved-heart murder ) are still prosecuted as murder. If the intended result may have been a simple battery, the law views the resulting death as an intentional homicide. In the discussion of what to title this article, the safest choice is to go by what reliable sources call the circumstances of her death, and they use the word murder overwhelmingly. Ichihashi has claimed he didn't intend to kill the person, but the unintended result of the injuries he has admitted to causing was death and thus still qualifies in the legal definition as murder. We certainly should not call Ichihashi a murderer unless he is convicted of such, but calling this article ‘‘The murder of Lindsey Hawker’’ is consistent with 1) reliable sources 2) legal definitions 3) WP:NPOV in that we are asserting facts as reported in the sources, and not our own opinions. Statisticalregression (talk) 07:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

You already said it: "prosecuted as murder" Which in my opinion does not mean murder. We have no idea if this is murder, It should be left to the court. The article is not neutral, but takes side with some newspaper editors and the dead person's parents. The only reliable source for the pronouncement of murder is a court of law verdict, not some random newspaper predicting the future. Wikipedia is not a crystalball or a platform for campaign of justice. Mootros (talk) 14:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Our opinions of what constitutes murder don't matter. What does matter is what the sources say. I'm certianly not going to sit here and try to convince you of what is and isn't murder as it's 1) pointless, and 2) you have some something driving an agenda here. WP is really not a good place to make a point.

A newspaper is not a reliable source for the pronouncement of murder! It's perfectly fine to state that newspaper editor X holds this onion, but fundamentally wrong this use this as the base of naming the article. Mootros (talk) 15:16, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

The Manga Connection

"Ichihashi .. had an interest in violent manga comics, which some reporters linked to the case"

It's patently obvious that Ichihashi was acting out some kind of necrophiliac sexual fetish:

http://www.animeuknews.net/news/1322/british-teacher-murdered-by-japanese-hentai-collector

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1547136/Post-mortem-secrets-of-woman-buried-in-sand.html

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Ichi_the_Killer

FAMOUS MURDERS IN JAPAN

http://factsanddetails.com/japan.php?itemid=813&catid=22&subcatid=147

Douzo Meshiagare .. :)

http://www.adultcartoonsuk.com/beta/websites/gorehentai/pictures/gallery01/ Viralmeme (talk) 13:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Variety of English

The article is written in American English and should, according to WP:RETAIN, keep that variety of English unless there is reason to change it based on strong national ties to the topic. The victim of the murder was English, which seems to me to be such a reason. Coyets (talk) 08:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Murder of Lindsay Hawker/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Well-written?

Writing is not clear in places, with some grammatical problems. Lead section does not serve as an introduction of the three things (see below) that are known to have happened and possibly what more is suspected; it does not tease the reader into reading more, rather leaves one puzzled. Mootros (talk) 11:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Factually accurate/Neutral?

This article is called "Murder of Lindsay Hawker". All that is known is that is that: 1) Hawker is dead after appearing to have been killed. 2) Hawker and Ichihashi both met; 3) Ichihashi has disappeared and a warrant for his arrest is out on suspicion of abandoning Hawker's body. A court of law normally pronounces "murder". No court case has yet happened. The claim about murder appear to have been construed, from citing a tabloid newspaper which half-way through an article, changes from killing to murder after citing an interview with Hawker's parents who called the death of their daughter a murder. Mootros (talk) 11:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The BBC more than qualifies as a reliable source, and this article for example http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/coventry_warwickshire/7958410.stm uses the word murder rather clearly. Again, Mootros, you Point Of View as to what constitutes murder is not relevant to how this article is named when reliable sources are already taking care of that for us. If you have a specific source that you take issue with in this article then you should indicate exactly which one is in question so others can weigh in. Statisticalregression (talk) 06:59, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

In Japan the main variation of the English language is American English, This murder happened to be in japan. Oh and PLEASE dont start another debate about this we can just leave it as is cant we? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.169.226 (talk) 13:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

File:LindsayHawker.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:LindsayHawker.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Lindsay Hawker picture by Tatsuya Ichihashi.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Lindsay Hawker picture by Tatsuya Ichihashi.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:28, 3 December 2011 (UTC)