Talk:Wrongful conviction of Juan Rivera

A fact from Wrongful conviction of Juan Rivera appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 June 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that an investigation into the case of Juan Rivera uncovered proof of evidence tampering when his shoes, which had the victim's blood on them, also bore DNA from the real killer?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/June.

Wikipedia

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

August 21 to 27, 2016 (20th)

On 4 October 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Juan Rivera (wrongful conviction) to Wrongful conviction of Juan Rivera. The result of the discussion was moved.

Requested move 13 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved (non-admin closure) Kharkiv07 (T) 16:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Rivera (wrongful conviction) → Juan Rivera (Illinois) – Yes, he was wrongly convicted but then exonerated. I can't find any other non-redirect article that uses this kind of disambiguation. Why not "Illinois" instead? I don't want to use "born 1972" because there aren't sources verifying his birth date yet. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 07:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I lean away from "Illinois" because I think it's better to use a dab that tells what the person is known for (Like "baseball player", "dog handler", etc) Also, given than Juan Rivera is a common name, there's a decent probability that another Juan Rivera from Illinois could pop up, so it might not be the best option. The appellate documents list his middle initial as "A". If there is a problem with "wrongful conviction", Juan A. Rivera might be an option. I think (wrongful conviction) is fine though (I mean, obviously, because otherwise I wouldn't have named it that. lol). Bali88 (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully, "Juan A. Rivera" is commonly used. --George Ho (talk) 10:59, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could you clarify what you mean by that? Bali88 (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll rephrase: I'm fine with the alternative but if only it is also commonly used per WP:NATURAL and WP:COMMONNAMES. --George Ho (talk) 02:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay. I can't really see any compelling reason to avoid (wrongful conviction) as a DAB. Bali88 (talk) 02:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I found Juan Rivera, Jr. from Sun-Times. However, there is another person from Pennsylvania of similar name [1] who was accused of sexual assault. I see your point. I couldn't find "Juan A. Rivera" in non-court sources. --George Ho (talk) 03:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should this article even have a personal name as a title? It's not a biography of Rivera but an account of his conviction and exoneration. What about Conviction and exoneration of Juan Rivera (cf. Conviction and exoneration of Glenn Ford, Wrongful conviction of Steve Titus)? — AjaxSmack 00:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to disagree that accounts of a person's conviction and exoneration need to be avoid being titled like a biography. I've seen a few titled that way lately (Kirsten Blaise Lobato, for instance), but, I mean, everyone who is notable is notable for some specific aspect of their life and their biography may include a paragraph about their personal life, but the bulk of it is about what they're famous for. Biographies about musicians or politicians or criminals are simply titled after their names even though they are famous for their professional life and the bulk of their articles are about what they did that made them notable. It's also easier to find the article when doing a google search if it's named after the person. Maybe there are aspects of this that I'm not considering, but I have yet to see a compelling reason to avoid titling them like a biography. I did the list of wrongful convictions article and it's how the bulk of wrongful conviction articles are already titled. Bali88 (talk) 01:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as proposed. I see no grounds in policy or otherwise for removing a dab which concisely describes what the article is about, or for replacing it with a much less informative dab.
However I wouldn't oppose Conviction and exoneration of Juan Rivera. Per Bali88, I don't see any pressing need to adopt that format, but nor do I oppose it when it is used in other artrcles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Implication that the drugs prescribed were complicit in the false confession

I wonder if the sentence "Rivera's mental state had not improved by the time the next interview was to take place, so he was placed in heavy restraints and a prison psychiatrist prescribed Haldol, Cogentin, and Ativan." ^[1] in the Investigation section isn't a bit misleading, as it implies that those drugs were somehow complicit in the false testimony, but the source used at the end of that paragraph specifies that, though he was prescribed the drugs, they were ultimately not administered. "When Nurse Enyeart checked on Rivera again at about 10:30 a.m., she saw no change. ... Because he was shackled and had no ability to injure himself at this point, the medications were not administered." ^[2]

I realize this is ultimately a small change, but it seems misleading. I didn't want to make the change without consulting first as to whether it was important enough to be warranted. Crmccarty (talk) 01:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

I'm the primary author on this article and honestly, I hadn't thought of that when I wrote it. I have no idea if others are perceiving it the way you are, but my thought process was more like, he was mentally disturbed enough at the time to need these heavy duty psych meds and yet they continued to question him despite his mental state. That's why I included it in the article. I have no major opinions either way, but if you feel strongly about it, it could be cleared up by saying "...psychiatrist prescribed Haldol, Cogentin, and Ativan, although they were not given."Bali88 (talk)

Largest such settlement in US history

This belongs in the first paragraph of the Lead along with his being known for 3 wrongful convictions, so I added it there.Parkwells (talk) 02:44, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 October 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Moved third article to Wrongful conviction of Paul Blackburn. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 08:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

– Juan Rivera is a person, not a wrongful conviction. He seems notable only for being wrongfully convicted (WP:BIO1E / WP:BLP1E). There was a previous RM for this article which failed, but that was for a different suggestion. The proposed title would provide WP:NATURAL disambiguation. Similar comments apply to the other two. The lead section of the Paul Blackburn article says he was wrongfully convicted, but it seems to be a matter of a lack of sufficient (properly obtained) evidence rather than an exoneration, perhaps the more conservative "overturned" is more accurate in that instance. The Robert Jones case also appeared poised to be retried when the charges were dropped. That may be the most difficult one. There is a BBC article that points pretty firmly toward a different suspect but there was no official exoneration as far as I can tell – the prosecution just declined to retry the case after the conviction was overturned. Rivera received a substantial compensation for his wrongful conviction, but there appears to have been no official declaration that Jones and Blackburn were actually innocent (as far as I know). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Indeed, these people are not themselves wrongful convictions. That's not how we disambiguate. However, Wrongful conviction of Paul Blackburn would be best for the third for consistency's sake. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[1] ttps://www.law.northwestern.edu/legalclinic/wrongfulconvictions/exonerations/documents/rivera_brief.pdf

[2] ttps://www.law.northwestern.edu/legalclinic/wrongfulconvictions/exonerations/documents/rivera_brief.pdf

[1]

[2]