Jump to content

Talk:Rodrigo Rosenberg Marzano

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

video source?

[edit]

Investigation about where the video como from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.154.70 (talk) 02:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Complete Statement

[edit]

Quite apart from not necessarily having the copyright on the English translation of his statement this is not appropriate to include in full in an encyclopedia, hence my removing it. If you want to put it back please explain your reasons here first. Thanks, SqueakBox 04:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with you. The sole purpose of the author creating the document was for it to become public. Additionally the author is dead, what copyrights are you referring to? The translation does not contain any offensive material and is at the core of the current controversy. Its length is moderate and should be made visible for interested readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.182.123.12 (talk) 05:08, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright does not end at someone's death and besides I was referring to the copyright of the translation. Sure the author wanted it public but this is not a public forum to express this person's views. I see another editor agrees with me, if readers are interested we have an external link to the translation. Thanks, SqueakBox 02:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could we put it on wikisource, and then link it from here?--Rayc (talk) 18:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Year of birth?

[edit]

Why does the infobox say that he was born in 1960 - died in 2009 (aged 48), while his article is in the category 1962 births? (as linked below) D(r)ead End (talk) 16:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume there was no investigation of the Musas' deaths?

[edit]

67.243.1.21 (talk) 19:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/04/04/110404fa_fact_grann, Khalil Musa was killed after refusing to pay a criminal gang he had bought textiles from for his factories. His daughter was an unfortunate unintended victim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.24.230.84 (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish?

[edit]

Rosenberg is a very common Jewish surname, and needless to say law is a very common Jewish profession. Any sources stating his family background/religous beliefs? 84.92.117.93 (talk) 23:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rosenberg went to a prestigious Catholic school, Liceo Guatemala. While it is not impossible that he was Jewish, it is unlikely. We were aware of non-Catholics there. Also, in answer to another question it is likely that he was born in 1960 since we were at the same level and I was born in 1960. I know because he used to bully me. Nevertheless, I firmly believe that he was murdered, the Paiz brothers were not involved, and everything was cooked up by a very corrupt CICIG and Ministerio Publico, to protect Alvaro Colom and his wife from the accusation. Whether they were involved or not, remains open. Incidentally, at the time of the events a Colombian narco-novela (a soap opera involving drug lords) was airing in Guatemalan TV, and in the series a very similar cover-up happened where a murder was made to appear as if the victim had planned his own murder. It is believed that this may have influenced those involved in the Rosenberg cover-up. Pantaleon de Armes (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phone location stuff

[edit]

I made a few changes here. [1]

Firstly, as I said in the edit summary for the first change, the info I removed was sourced to an irrelevent article about 911 location information. The only relevence would be via the WP:Syn ascertation that this counters the claim the phone call was made from the apartment.

Second, the info about the where the phone call isn't sourced. I added a primary source, the CICIG report but since I don't understand Spanish, I couldn't verify it definitely says what our article says. I couldn't even use machine translation to help much, since copying stuff from the PDF seems to lose the white spaces so these need to be added back. I did find something about a call being made from in the apartment to López Florián, as well as something about two phones being used either in the same vehicle, or in a vehicle following the other, but couldn't work out which part was about the call made to the killers being from within the apartment.

In any case, I'm fairly sure this primary source doesn't say the phone info was "This key piece of evidence was used to convince the Guatemalan populace and the world that Rodrigo Rosenberg had himself killed", so that part remains unsourced.

Finally, if you read the same sections of the primary source I did, you're reminded why it's a bad idea to allow that sort of OR, like the mention of a 911 location accuracy article to counter the claim the phone call was made from in the apartment. At least for the López Florián thing, locating the call within the apartment appears to be based on later testing/forensic analysis. To be fair, IMO a lot of such forensic analysis, even that presented in courts in places with supposedly decent justice systems tends to be poor, with a lack of good controls, verification, basic science considerations etc. (Okay you established you will get this signal level from within the apartment. But how much testing did you do to confirm you won't get the same signal levels from another apartment or near the apartment, or at different times of the day etc, or depending on the phone, or how it's held. So what level of confidence should we really have in your claim, and how did you come up with that level of confidence.)

However such problems aside, there's obviously a difference in saying you can't have such a high level of location accuracy for every call from every phone for every random location; to whether it's possible by carefully testing signal levels in different locations after the fact, to give a better location accuracy for a specific previous phone call. To be clear, this doesn't mean I'm not suspect about the location accuracy. But rather we need a proper source, which has actually looked at the testing they've done, and commented on whether they could really reliably conclude the location with such a level of accuracy from their testing.

Nil Einne (talk) 16:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Rodrigo Rosenberg Marzano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:59, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rodrigo_Rosenberg_Marzano&oldid=1202951317"