Talk:Stewart Murray Wilson

Tone

This article is extremely negative in tone and content. It is little more than a history of his offending and contains no points expressing Wilson's side of the story. Neither does it contain comments from his lawyer or clinical psychologists about his risk of reoffending. Offender9000 (talk) 00:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

"This article is extremely negative in tone and content." And quite rightly so, as it deals with one of the most disgusting individuals currently imprisoned in New Zealand. It might not be obvious now that you've comprehensively whitewashed the article, but Wilson's convictions include multiple counts of rape and other physical violence against women, raping of children, raping of animals and drugging of women. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

---

cjwainwr writes, "I have edited the entire entry to exclude non-encyclopaedic material; and to exclude none verifiable biographical material. I think this alters the tone of the article.

Moreover, it is not'Bold text'encyclopaedic to include different "side(s) of the story". I have retained the reference of the Parole Board to their view of his risk of re-offending; and retained Wilson's statements to the High Court of his exclusion by NZ prison authorities from rehabilitative actions and/or events"Cjwainwr (talk) 08:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)cjwainwr.

Hi there - I have been trying to correct an inaccuracy on this individual's page, but it keeps reverting back to the old information. There is a sentence in the "Lack of rehabilitation in prison" section talking about how Corrections have never allowed him to enter treatment despite him meeting the criteria for cognitive distortions. This is not true. The reason he has never been allowed to enter treatment is because the main criteria for being included in treatment programmes is the admission of guilt - something Stewart Murray Wilson has never done. The inaccurate wording makes it sound like the Corrections Department were standing in the way of his treatment but this is not the case - his failure to admit guilt is the reason. It is also misleading to discuss cognitive distortions in this context because they have no bearing on whether someone admits their guilt (i.e. you can admit guilt and still hold cognitive distortions about your offending).

Sources: by Guest User. 202.37.32.2 (talk) 00:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

References

GPS Tracking

"Another condition was for him to wear a GPS tracking device - the first prisoner ever to be fitted with one."... I believe this is incorrect. He is not the first prisoner ever to be fitted with a global positioning satellite device, not even in New Zealand. If someone else could research this to prove my belief then change that in the article then be my guest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 20:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I have altered this reference by expanding the aconymn 'GPS'; and by deleting reference to any claim that fitting such a device to Wilson is or was a "first"...My investigations reveal the appropriate verification data is held within the files of the NZ Justice/Corrections Department.Cjwainwr (talk) 08:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)cjwainwr

Rehabilitation

The rehabilitation section appears to blame the justice department for Wilson's lack of rehabilitation. However the high court says in [1]:

Further, Mr Wilson had done nothing to ameliorate his high risk. He denied his offending and refused to engage in any form of offence related treatment. He had no insight into his offending and did not accept responsibility for his behaviour. In support of his application for parole, Mr Wilson proposed release plans that were unrealistic and undeveloped.

and

Mr Wilson since his offending has done nothing to help himself. He has refused to acknowledge his criminality. He has refused to co-operate with Corrections in rehabilitation. He has refused to acknowledge he needs help. He has refused to participate in the process of setting conditions or where he might live. His suggestions as to conditions on parole have been superficial and poorly thought out and have provided no assistance at all either to Corrections or the Parole Board in considering his case.

I think that the high court can be relied on as a reliable source in this matter. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Balance

The balance and tone of this article seems to have been a long term problem. Stewart Murray Wilson is known for being an offender who has committed a wide range of serious sexual offences and is viewed as someone who is highly like to re-offend - yet that almost gets lost on this page. I agree with the comments above that the tone and balance is not neutral. Therefore I've placed tags. Clarke43 (talk) 23:28, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

bulk revert?

I propose reverting this article to this version, which was immediately before the complete rewrite by the now-banned User:Offender9000. The article would then need to be updated for recent events, obviously. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/beast-gets-taste-of-freedom-in-prison-gardens/ER4PBQ2NC7F4OWE5DH5ZBVNLUM/ https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/councils-fear-of-beast-irresponsible/NW27SR43ZZ5QA5PYTWBSIR6SHE/ https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/herald-on-sunday-editorial-the-beast-must-go-somewhere/436JJLXCFXNFTYSAHIBZ4PMFPI/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Sennecaster (talk) 19:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)