Talk:Killing of Jerry Waller

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Edge3 (talk) 02:36, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a Fort Worth police officer who shot and killed a 72-year-old white man on his own property in 2013 did not face any charges? Source: "A Tarrant County grand jury has decided not to indict Fort Worth police officer R.A. Hoeppner for the May 28 fatal shooting of 72-year-old Jerry Waller at his home.", Dallas Morning News, 2014
  • ALT1: ... that the Fort Worth police involved in the 2013 fatal shooting of a 72-year-old white man on his own property had accidentally gone to the wrong house? Source: "Officers B.B. Hanlon and R.P. Hoeppner were dispatched to 409 Havenwood Lane at 12:51 a.m. May 28. But after arriving at 12:58 a.m., they 'inadvertently began searching' across the street at 404 Havenwood, where 72-year-old Jerry Waller lived." Fort Worth Star-Telegram; 2014
    • ALT2: ... that a Fort Worth police officer who shot and killed a 72-year-old white man on his own property in 2013 has been denied qualified immunity because the man might have been unarmed at the time? "In sum, the plaintiffs' specific and detailed factual pleadings about the crime-scene evidence make plausible their allegation that Waller followed Hoeppner's commands, put down his weapon, and was unarmed when Hoeppner shot him. If this allegation is true, then qualified immunity would not shield Hoeppner from the plaintiffs' excessive-force claim ... Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order denying Hoeppner's motion for judgment on the pleadings on the plaintiffs' excessive-force claim." Waller v. Hanlon, 922 F. 3d 590, at 601 (5th Cir., 2019)
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The UWI Seismic Research Centre
  • Comment: It's a narrow time frame, but ... I am hoping that this can run on May 28 (i.e., this coming Sunday), the 10th anniversary of the incident, as indicated by the hooks. Per below exchange, I have edited the hooks to remove the anniversary material and have no date preference. Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Moved to mainspace by Daniel Case (talk). Self-nominated at 06:00, 24 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Killing of Jerry Waller; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• @Daniel Case: Just want to let you know that the May 28th queue has been filled so the earliest it will appear is the 31st. but most likely will be the 1st.— Preceding unsigned comment added by PalauanLibertarian (talk • contribs)

@PalauanLibertarian: Then I'll take the anniversary stuff out of the hooks ... I had tried to start this early enough to make the anniversary date workable, but then things on- and off-wiki just blew up on me. Oh well. Daniel Case (talk) 02:25, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

• Article was newly written and is long enough. I took care in reviewing the text as we are talking about a police killing of a possibly unarmed man and it does appear to adhere to NPOV. The use of primary documents aids verification. Hooks are verified by inline citations. No close paraphrasing is present, with Earwig only noting some similarities with legal terms that we have to replicate verbatim. QPQ is provided. My only concern is that may be too much text to bold as piped text for the link, but I don't have better ideas and that can be smithed after approval. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:08, 4 July 2023 (UTC)