Talk:Ericka Huggins

New Haven Black Panther
Major rewrites and reverts should be discussed on this talk page per WP policy.Pokey5945 (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Pokey5945--new to Wikipedia, sorry if it's taken me a while to figure things out. I was prompted to make edits when I read the prior New Haven Trial Section and hope to develop other areas soon but you keep undoing my revisions. Is there something I'm doing wrong? As I've been getting acclimated to Wikipedia I stumbled across their Biography of Living Persons policy which your earlier post seems to violate: "Biographies of living persons ("BLP"s) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. "Politigrafica (talk) 01:10, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * BLP is important, but so is NPOV. The facts of Huggins' participation in Rackley's interrogation were well-established at trial and in the media, and should not be concealed. Furthermore, insinuations of police involvement in the murder are far-fetched. Much of your revision reads like the BP apologia, which was to blame it all on Sams and then claim that he was police. I don't object to my work being revised, but I would ask you to respect the NPOV policy.Pokey5945 (talk) 20:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

To say police and FBI involvement is far-fetched is to ignore the volumes of information that has become available over the years--much from FBI and informants themselves. The 2007 article I cited clearly outlines to what extent the New Haven police were complicit in the event. There are dozens of articles outlining George Sams' violent past and erratic behaviour and while there may never be evidence to prove his "agent provocateur" status, his actions are certainly in line with this. As for Huggins' involvement other than whatever Sams' got her to say on tape, there's no evidence she ever participated in his torture or murder. Evidence clearly puts that on Sams. I believe my point of view to be neutral however I admit I do hold forces like COINTELPRO in large part responsible not only for creating the atmosphere that resulted in Rackley's death, but for also creating/manipulating situations and even sacrificing lives in their zeal to destroy the efforts of the Black Panthers and other organizations.
 * If there are articles about Sams' past that are relevant, they should probably go into his bio, not this one. This is Huggins' bio, and so should focus on her actions. I agree that the local police had an informant and were surveilling the BP chapter, but I'm not sure how that is relevant to this article. It should focus on Huggins' role and her trial, with only enough background given to contextualize. We don't know that Sams was instrumental in getting Huggins on tape, do we? We can only report what she said, and what was brought out in trial.Pokey5945 (talk) 02:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Pokey5945: your persistence in adding increasingly more contentious material in the New Haven Trial section is in clear violation of Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons. Your insistence on the torture and murder details, neither of which she was involved in, is puzzling. Whatever your personal opinion is of Ms. Huggins, it is not appropriate to pepper this Wikipedia page with cobbled together hearsay and innuendo. Please respect Wikipedia's policy regarding this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Politigrafica (talk • contribs) 05:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The audio tape records Huggins describing the torture and justifying it. I don't see any reason to exclude this.Pokey5945 (talk) 16:25, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * As the jury voted 10-2 for acquittal and the judge dismissed the charges, I believe that it is contrary to BLP policy to include lengthy and lurid details of a crime she was not convicted of. I agree with the points made by .  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  06:36, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Please specify which details you want to change.Pokey5945 (talk) 16:25, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * To start, I would eliminate the first paragraph detailing crimes that others were convicted of, changing it to a single summarizing sentence. I would add the fact that the jury voted 10-2 for her acquittal.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  17:08, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that the description of the crime and the police involvement can be greatly reduced. My original version did include the jury acquittal, which I agree is essential to include. It's also essential to include the audio tape quote, since that was the basis for Huggins' indictment, and is a non-controversial fact of the case.Pokey5945 (talk) 19:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

As point of fact, Huggins and Seale were charged with conspiracy in the murder, not with anything related to the torture of Alex Rackley. The tape was not the basis for her indictment and the tape's very existence was an extremely controversial part of the case as it was made by the very person who not only provoked the incident but became the star witness for the prosecution. Insisting on making this the major focus on Ericka Huggins page is defamatory and certainly not a neutral point of view. If hearing this contrived tape is the basis for your views in holding Huggins accountable somehow, then I strongly suggest broadening your sources and doing some more reading on this trial. There is real historic significance to this moment in history and your need to eliminate anything but a focus on Rackley's torture is puzzling. I saw from your personal talk page that others have had similar situations with you. Please respects Wikipedia's policy. Politigrafica — Preceding unsigned comment added by Politigrafica (talk • contribs) 19:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ad hominem attacks are not consistent with productive negotiation or WP policy. I would invite you to contribute to an article on this murder trial. We should keep the section in Huggins' bio limited to the documented facts of her involvement, given that the larger context seems to be the main point of contention.Pokey5945 (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed rewrite for New Haven BP section
In 1970, members of the New Haven Black Panthers tortured and murdered Alex Rackley, who they suspected of being an informant. Huggins was charged as an accessory to the crime. According to trial testimony, Huggins boiled water to torture Rackley with. Huggins' voice is heard on an audio tape of Rackley's interrogation by the Panthers that was played at her trial. Huggins' attorney argued that she was afraid and not acting of her own accord when participating in Rackley's interrogation, and not a participant in the murder itself. The jury deadlocked 10 to 2 for Huggins' acquittal, and she was not retried.


 * I think that this rewrite is an improvement. I recommend leaving out the boiling water sentence since she wasn't convicted. The YouTube video seems to be a primary source, so I recommend keeping it out. Are there online links available to any of the other sources?  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  01:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I've added links to the references in the article.-- Auric    talk  01:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I have removed the yt ref. I also redacted the quote from Huggins. Assuming that this rewrite addresses the other editors' concerns as stated above, I'll insert it into the article.Pokey5945 (talk) 20:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

It's getting tiresome reinserting the references with the urls, so I've updated them here.-- Auric    talk  01:31, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm attempting to expand this section and for some reason Pokey5945 keeps undoing it. The New Haven Trial was about more than a torture tape, Ericka Huggins was not charged nor convicted of participation in torture yet you seem hellbent on making that appear the case. What is your fixation on this? Please allow the full history to be told instead of your narrow, fixated version--which is again, in violation of Wikipedia's policy on Biographies of Living Persons as it's not a neutral point of view and is extremely defamatory.Politigrafica (talk) 01:38, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Politigrafica
 * I have redacted the section to focus only on Huggins' involvement. If you want to write about the larger context, that should go into a different article, not this one. I disagree that there is anything remotely defamatory in my version, given that it is all well-sourced and non-controversial.Pokey5945 (talk) 19:26, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can see your only source is the discredited government witness--who was widely considered an agent provocateur. While that may never be proved, no one disputes that Sams initiated the incident and was responsible for getting everyone on tape. You consider that well-sourced and non-controversial? You're being unreasonable and strangely intent on defaming Huggins. Why? Politigrafica (talk) 00:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC) Politigrafica
 * Even ignoring your ad hominem, I'm still having a hard time following your argument. I don't know who you mean by "discredited government witness". There is no citation at all to George Sams or any other witness. You have not specified any defamation, or even anything that's controversial in my version.Pokey5945 (talk) 02:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * We cannot say that "According to trial testimony, Huggins did " if she was not convicted of any such crime. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 05:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that Huggins did not dispute her participation during the trial proceedings, and that the statement is not controversial. But I am okay with taking it out.Pokey5945 (talk) 16:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your understanding is incorrect, Huggins was neither accused nor charged with participation in the torture or murder. You are confusing her recounting events she witnessed with complicity in the act. And splicing these things together to make her appear complicit is defamatory. Thank you for taking it out and leaving it out.Politigrafica (talk) 19:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)Politigrafica
 * Huggins was charged with murder, conspiracy, and kidnaping, according to the newspaper I cited in the article. Do you have a contradicting source?Pokey5945 (talk) 20:00, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed addition of Early Life and Inspirations, Education, Incarceration and Police Power, and Sustaining Activism and Promoting Change through Spirituality sections
Hello,

I am editing this page to talk more about Ericka Huggins' early life and what inspired her to become the person that she is today. I would also like to talk about the importance of education reform in her life, the influence of incarceration and police power, and lastly, how she uses spirituality to sustain activism and promote change.

Iesha-LaShay Phillips (talk) 17:48, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your changes. Any such additions need to comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please read Verifiability and the Neutral point of view. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:22, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oral histories are not acceptable sources on Wikipedia for anything other than minor biographical details. We build biographies by summarizing secondary reliable sources independent of the subject of the article. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:28, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

To add to article
To add to this article: she is vegan. Source 173.88.246.138 (talk) 02:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Race, Gender and Nation
— Assignment last updated by Lewiskatrinaa (talk) 15:11, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

What is Huggins doing nowadays?
The infobox shows that Huggins is still presently active. Yet, there is no information about her recent activities. Is this an error, or is there relevant information that is missing? LaborHorizontal (talk) 04:13, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
 * , I found a recent article that you can use as a reference to expand the article here. You may find other sources. Go for it. Cullen328 (talk) 04:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)