Talk:Killing of Donald Scott

POV tag added

I added a POV tag to the article as it has a number of speculative statements and seems to clearly side against the law enforcement officials in this event without providing any inline citations and only giving three references at the end of the article, all of which appear to be potentially biased. No citations provided from major reliable publications or news outlets. Dugwiki 15:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I added the villiage voice. The problem is that sources such as the LA times seem to not have this in their archives, but more biased stories remember this case. I'll also look for the lawusit between the LAPD officer and the Ventura County DA. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 18:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I found the copies of the actual reports by the Ventura County DA. These are copies of official government documents. Can't get more authoritative than that. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 20:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This man had no marijuana plants on his property and was raided for having marijuana plants. He was shot for wielding a gun on his own premises, which is legal, after hearing his wife's pleas of "Please don't shoot me." Helicopter, canines, and "a high-tech Jet Propulsion Laboratory device for detecting trace amounts of sinsemilla" were dispatched by police officers, and could not find a single shred of marijuana.

There is no basis for objection to the neutrality of this article. This event did occur; a man with no marijuana plants was raided for possession of marijuana plants. He was then subsequently shot while trying to defend his wife, who is yelling "Please don't shoot me." There is no "spin" on this article, facts are stated neutrally and without bias.

Anon, As the original author, it would be wrong for me to remove the tags. Get an account of your own if you feel that way so that you can remove dispute tags, while I continue to footnote. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 22:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Jason, I was posting in response to Dugwiki's statement "it has a number of speculative statements and seems to clearly side against the law enforcement officials in this event." I detect no language clearly siding against law enforcement officials in this article. I remember viewing a television news piece on this incident when it happened, and subsequently when the wrongful death trial reached settlement. Every fact from the incident is reported accurately in this incident, including the wife's account. I fail to detect any language "clearly" siding against law enforcement officials. - D_evans45@hotmail.com

I'm glad you agree, but don't delete comments when adding comments of your own. Anyway, as I said, get an account. That way you can remove the NPOV tag yourself. I'd do it but I'm the article's original author and while I could some would say it is a conflict of interest for me to do so. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 16:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

NPOV dispute

Ok, this really needs to be settled. What, EXACTLY, is NPOV in this sourced article? It is important to be specific about this since there is an NPOV tag added. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 04:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)