Talk:Fudan poisoning case

Questions from a new editor
So, I'm trying to become a better copy editor. I've noticed that this article presents speculation about Lin's motives as fact. For example, in the Relationship section: "This made Lin want to pull a poisoning prank on Huang Yang to make him sick." I can't read Chinese very well, so I assume that part of Lin's defense was that he intended the poisoning to be mild. Is it standard policy to present motivations in this way?

Another question regarding legal proceedings. This sentence in the Police investigation and Arrest section: "Lin Senhao never told the truth, including when he was investigated by the police." Is this considered an NPOV issue? If the court case found that Lin had never told the truth, I guess that would be a verifiable statement. Anyway, I'm going to make the edits that seem best to me, and direct to this talk page in the edit summary. Thank you for your guidance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleChongsto (talk • contribs) 19:43, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There is a difference between text where Wikipedia is speculating about something and Wikipedia cites a source that documents that speculation. The former is Wikipedia editorializing. However, if a claim can be verified in a source, it should be attributed to whom ever made the statement and the source cited, because that becomes a verifiable fact about the speculative statement. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 07:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)