Talk:Murder of Laken Riley

Source from the internet archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20241122002957/https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/analysis/nursing-student-laken-riley-murder-guilty-jose-ibarra-rcna181256

MSNBC later changed the heading after people criticized it for allegedly showing sympathy to a convicted murder.

It is my understanding that wikipedia does not consider these sources to be reliable for news. However, I think they can be used to cite opinion, especially since the internet archive proves that MSNBC really did publish that heading.

Would it be possible to mention this in the article, perhaps in a reaction section, or a section that cites criticism of media coverage?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-headline-laken-rileys-killer-never-chance-sparks-backlash-absolutely-sickening

https://www.foxnews.com/media/after-backlash-msnbc-changes-headline-online-piece-claiming-laken-rileys-killer-never-stood-chance

https://www.yahoo.com/news/msnbc-alters-sickening-laken-riley-180213487.html

https://nypost.com/2024/11/22/media/msnbc-slammed-for-article-claiming-laken-rileys-killer-never-stood-a-chance/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14115989/laken-riley-msnbc-MAUREEN-CALLAHAN.html

The Last Hungry Cat (talk) 03:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

{{ping|Therealslimfan}} Regarding your three edits to remove Tibbetts and Nungaray from the 'See also' section[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Murder_of_Laken_Riley&diff=prev&oldid=1258951057][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Murder_of_Laken_Riley&diff=prev&oldid=1258971957][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Murder_of_Laken_Riley&diff=prev&oldid=1259259273], these are similar events and related in the sense that reliable sources: [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/laken-riley-georgia-campus-murder-b2652282.html The Independent] [https://edition.cnn.com/2024/06/26/us/jocelyn-nungaray-killing-houston/index.html CNN] [https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-exploits-daughter-mollie-tibbetts-murder-1235149834/ Rolling Stone] [https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/jocelyn-nungaray-houston-trump-biden-debate-immigration-rcna158394 NBC], for example, all mention Riley's murder as well as Tibbetts/Nungaray's when writing their article(s). Some1 (talk) 15:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

:Dosen't change the fact that this is an obviously racist narrative and the motif behind the victim's murder is much more complex and is NECESSARY not to jump to dumb conclusions and actually SEE the motifs and problems that lead to this situation, not only is a matter for respect the victim (to understand what lead to her death instead of delusional takes) and other future victims that might experience harm by immigrants or most likely citizens. Therealslimfan (talk) 22:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

::I can see both arguments here - since basically the entire reason this murder is notable connects to how Ibarra's immigration status was sensationalized, it makes sense for the "See also" section to link to cases that share that aspect. That said, I think it might make sense to include Effects of immigration to the United States#Crime either alongside or instead of the individual cases of Tibbetts and Nungary, as that article provides more context to the overarching issue. The larger issue is that with how contentious the topic is, I've noticed pretty much all the articles even tangential to immigration have become bloated and sensationalized themselves. I'm more inclined to support retooling the article body (both of this article and the linked cases) to be less one-sided than to cut out the links altogether. Thesixthstaff (talk) 23:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

:::I added two paragraphs that relate Riley's death to three other ones (including Tibbetts and Nungaray's) to the #Tributes and media attention section, so the See also links to Tibbetts and Nungaray are no longer necessary. (Unless my recent addition gets reverted for whatever reasons, then yes, those two links should be added back to the See also when that happens. A link to [[Effects of immigration to the United States#Crime]] isn't controversial so that would fine alongside Tibbetts and Nungaray's links.) Some1 (talk) 01:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

:[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/25/us/houston-venezuelan-immigrants-murder-jocelyn-nungaray.html New York Times] [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-23/laken-riley-donald-trump-election-campaign/104633968 ABC News] [https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/kamala-harris-pressed-on-rachel-morins-death-immigration-policies-in-fox-news-interview/ CBS News] Some1 (talk) 21:29, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

{{atop

| result = Unfortunately this discussion has devolved into unproductive WP:Soapboxing. Some1 (talk) 10:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

}}

The notability of this case is entirely due to it's politicization by the MAGA crowd, yet that is the aspect that's barely even touched on.

Wikipedia does not have a full article for every single murder that has ever occurred in the history of the world, only the ones that are extensively covered by reliable sources due to particular aspects that make them notable. The murder of Laken Riley would be just another one of the many, many murder cases that occurred in 2024, if the Trump campaign didn't exploit it for political gain.

That is what they have done, they have been extensively criticized and condemned for it, and both their actions and the condemnation has been widely covered by reliable sources. So why does the Wikipedia article not reflect this objective reality? 46.97.170.199 (talk) 14:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

:If this aspect of it has been covered this much according to you, do you have any sources of your own backing up your word? Harryhenry1 (talk) 11:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

::I agree! Harryhenry1221 (talk) 14:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

::And if not, the article can be deleted as non-notable. 46.97.170.199 (talk) 11:09, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

:I added a paragraph about this a couple of days ago to the article (attributed to the Rolling Stone using this article [https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-exploits-daughter-mollie-tibbetts-murder-1235149834/]), but it was removed due to WP:ROLLINGSTONEPOLITICS (makes sense, I guess). I've now just added a sentence regarding the usage of Riley's death (among others) by the Trump campaign using an ABC News source. Some1 (talk) 22:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

::You know it's funny, but this past summer we had an extremely lengthy, month long NPOV discussion about this very issue, archived herehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard/Archive_112#h-Laken_Riley_Murder-20240621204800. My position was essentially identical to IP's, but after all that deliberation, nothing ever came of it. We were supposed to submit drafts for an Rfc, but only two of us showed up to do that, and it just fizzled out to nothing. Jonathan f1 (talk) 07:37, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

:The murders/deaths of George Floyd, Michael Brown, Freddy Gray, etc would be another one of the many, many police killing cases if they weren't exploited for political gain. 164.95.64.80 (talk) 22:02, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

::Yeah, except the disproportionate targeting of black men by police is a well-known and documented phenomenon. The "violent crime surge" by illegal immigrants isn't documented at all, it's fiction. Jonathan f1 (talk) 20:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

:::Just another vote (I have POTUS on live now).

:::Laken is notable for the Laken Riley Act., despite the politicization by MAGA at any turn.

:::I just want to note that President Trump referred to a middle name so her full name is Laken Hope Riley.

:::Perhaps one of you regular folks would check and update that accordingly. 2A04:4A43:912F:F9C6:A871:26DB:4D26:FD74 (talk) 21:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

::::Laken is known for politicization by MAGA. The Laken Riley Act is further politicization by MAGA. Had the murderer been a white guy from Canada or Idaho, we would never have heard about it. O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::On a purely factual basis- Laken was murdered by an illegal migrant. If this individual was not here- and this is a fact- Laken would be alive right now. 72.211.181.161 (talk) 19:59, 15 February 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.151.230.53 (talk)

::The murder of George Floyd is notable because of the protests that followed it, and the massive momentum those protests gave to the anti-racist movement in the US, and also worldwide, and wikipedia accurately reflects this fact. If the protests were in response to the murder of someone else, then that other murder would be notable instead.

::The murder of Laken Riley is notable because of the twisted and quite honestly tasteless way in which the trump campaign exploited this tragic event for the sake of a political stunt, and because to this very day, trump is STILL shamelessly milking it for political clout. Yet the article does not reflect this at all, and completely ignores the wide-spread condemnation of these tactics, despite how widely covered it is by mainstream sources.

::I hope that answers your question. 46.97.170.73 (talk) 14:29, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

{{abot}}

I added information from reliable sources to document how this case became a rallying call for Republicans during the 2024 election. Hopefully that addresses people's concerns that there was a lack of context. Remember (talk) 13:35, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

No idea whatsoever how to make changes, but in the 'perpetrator' section it reads..

'ICE stated that it had missed opportunity'

It should read..

'ICE stated that it had missed an opportunity'.

Yep. RooRaaahCrumbs (talk) 03:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

This is what the Hill article about the Laken Riley Act says:

{{tq|Nonetheless, critics fear migrants would be placed in detention without due process.

'This is a radical departure from current law, which since 1996 has generally required mandatory detention only for persons who are criminally convicted or who admit to having committed certain serious crimes. That is, when criminal guilt is certain and established beyond a reasonable doubt,' said Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

'Under this bill, a person who has lived in the United States for decades, say for most of her life, paid taxes and bought a home, but who is mistakenly arrested for shoplifting would not be free to resume her life, but rather would be detained and deported, even if the chargers are dropped.'}}

I think it is reasonable to describe the changes made by the law as detaining people arrested for theft or burglary without due process. @FMSky @Some1, how do you think this should be described instead? What do other editors think? Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 04:18, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

:Do you have another source saying that the Act requires the detainment of illegal immigrants arrested for theft or burglary without due process? None of what you quoted in the Hill's article [https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5071850-house-republicans-pass-border-security-bill-laken-riley/] backs up your edit that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Murder_of_Laken_Riley&diff=prev&oldid=1285678059]: {{!xt|On March 7, 2024, the House of Representatives passed the Laken Riley Act, a bill that would require federal detention of illegal immigrants arrested for burglary or theft {{underline|without due process}}.}} Not even the Laken Riley Act article mentions anything about due process. Some1 (talk) 04:40, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

::I think the section I quoted pretty clearly explains that anyone suspected of theft or burglary will be detained and likely deported prior to ever receiving a trial (aka due process) to determine if they are guilty of those crimes. How do you feel about the phrasing that the bill requires "the detention without due process of immigrants charged with theft or burglary"? Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

:::No it doesn't. Control F "due process" in the Hill article and you get {{tqq|critics fear migrants would be placed in detention without due process}} and a quote from Rep. Raskin, neither of which says that the bill explicitly requires "detention without due process". If this were indeed true, then you should easily find another RS to back up that claim. I do understand where you're coming from though, but the current wording of the sentence ({{blue|would require federal detention of illegal immigrants arrested for burglary or theft}}) doesn't necessarily imply that there is due process, just that there has been an arrest regardless of whether the suspect is actually guilty or not. Maybe you could add a short sentence or two about due process to the Laken Riley Act article in the Support/Opposition section. Some1 (talk) 14:23, 15 April 2025 (UTC)