Talk:Hi-Fi murders

Racial bias of jury
There is multiple statements on this, but there is zero proofs. Are there any real proofs that jurors had any conflict of interest in this case, besides the skin color of jurors? Just another black spot on the face of AI organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.113.164.34 (talk) 20:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Location
I'm virtually certain the article has it wrong when it locates the crimes as taking place in Ogden, Utah. This confusion arose because the store where the killings occurred was named "Ogden's Hi-Fi". It was located in Salt Lake City. I will not change the article until I get a reference, though. Ellsworth 23:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, my bad. The shop was in Ogden, Weber County. State v. Pierre, 572 P.2d 1338 (1977). For some reason I thought it was SLC. Ellsworth 23:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Additional information that maybe should/could be added
According to there was a third assailant, Keith Roberts, who allegedly had no knowledge that Andrews and Pierre planned to commit the murders. He was convicted of armed robbery for his role in the scenario.


 * Once I'm able to get more evidence, I'll add the third assailant to the article. SailorAlphaCentauri 17:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It looks like he was added to the article, but the reader gets through more than half of the article before his name comes up. This probably needs to be cleaned up with more citations and a neutral point-of-view (it has a lot of impassioned statements with no source to back it up).  If I have the time, I'll try to do what I can with it. SailorAlphaCentauri 17:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Local band named after this
Hi, I just wanted to point attention to a local band (layton, utah) named HI-FI Murder. I was wondering if this would/could go in to here?


 * Sorry, just totally non-notable. 67.160.174.24 (talk) 09:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree. Non-notable trivia, such as a band or song named after murder-related events, people, etc., detracts from the quality and seriousness of these types of articles.  mo   talk  22:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Veracity / POV
I've just read Victim (the Gary Kinder book). My version is the paperback Atlantic Monthly Press one, with the 1990 afterword by the author.

I have several questions, not in particular order of importance:

(1) Dale Pierre changed his name multiple times while imprisoned. P:299: In all, Pierre changed his name twenty seven times. His final name was indeed Pierre Dale Selby, but I know of no reason why he should be referred to as such in this article. He was Dale S. Pierre at birth and when he committed the crimes and both the prosecutor and I think that is the name that is appropriate. Do you prefer one of his other names, like Del Ray Hoyt, Cody Jay Cavalho, or Houston Lee Hunt? I am changing his name back to Pierre.

(2) The paragraph describing the recovery of the victims' wallets is at odds with the account in Witness. Specifically, the two "teenage" dumpster divers are named (P.110) as 12-year-old Charlie Marshall and 11-year-old Walter Grissom. They were interrupted by an airman on the base, 18-year-old Paul Waddon, who asked for the wallets they had recovered. The boys handed over the one belonging to Michelle Ansley and when Waddon called the number in her wallet to tell her he had it, the police immediately descended on the air force dumpster.

(3) Witness contains no desciption of the police officer who is reported to have recieved a citation for his acting skills in searching the dumpster and picking up on Pierre and Andrews acting nervous in person at the scene. In fact, at about the same time, the police had received the phone tip identifying Pierre and Andrews. In the book, all the police saw was someone watching from the second floor.

(4) Pierre was already a suspect in another brutal slaying of a fellow airman. Police had him on file and fingerprinted, had plenty of motive, but could not proceed to trial due to a lack of physical evidence in that case.

(5) The first paragraph identfies the culprits as 19-year-olds. In Witness, Dale Pierce was a 20-year-old suspected murderer 5 months before the attack (P. 81)

(6) The article states that Michelle Ansley sobbed and begged for her life. Who would not have? In the interest of fairness, Witness says (presumably via Mr Walker) that Cortney did too. And why wouldn't he? I have added that.

(7) The article as originally written says that Michelle Ansley was not fed Drano. That is contrary to what Witness says on P.36. I have fixed that. There's some sort of despicable thread running through this that Michelle Ansley was a coward and got special treatment. If being force-fed drano, raped (the only victim to be) and shot to death is special treatment, I am out of words. If being terrified at what was happening to her made her a coward, I am a coward. I believe that Michelle was not fed Drano because Pierre was planning on raping her.

(8) A small point, but Mrs. Naisbitt was not pronounced DOA at the hospital. She was breathing sporadically and they did a bunch of tests, oxygen bagging her, x-raying her head. Sadly, she was beyond help.

(9) Witness says (p.41) that Pierre told Andrews to leave the room and give him 30 minutes. It was during those 30 minutes that Pierre raped Ansley. I have changed the article to reflect that.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.189.162.201 (talk) 07:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Can Wiki simply refer to the perpetrators as animals? Surely, that would be both more accurate and informative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.164.20.110 (talk) 11:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Keith Roberts
This seems like nonsense to me:

"The Hi-Fi murders were committed by the following three men, all of whom were United States Air Force airmen at the time of the crime.

(...)

Keith Roberts: The court found that Keith Roberts had no role in, or knowledge of, the murders though he was convicted of armed robbery. Roberts was paroled in 1987."

Either Keith committed the murders or he didn't. I have no knowledge of the case, but can someone who does correct this section?

Theeurocrat (talk) 15:56, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

→ I realize this is a rather old article but I was reviewing it with my kids regarding the damage drinking drano or bleach can cause (kids ask weird questions). One point I noticed is this point about Roberts. I have no resources to look at but I suspect he was convicted as an accomplice to the robbery which usually carries the same conviction in most states, albeit lesser sentences as the ones committing the crime.

Another point I have to disagree with is the NAACP stating the trial was racially bias. Stating evidence that it was a completely white jury, white victims, etc. is obvious but negates a very important point - there were hardly any people of black ancestry in Utah at all, especially in 1974. The fact they found one to be in the jury selection process is impressive to say the least. Currently, less than 1.5% of the population of Utah is black or identifies as black in the 2010 census. Although the point the NAACP made should be included as well as the mysterious note found by the jury, I feel the demographic statistics should also be included to improve the NPOV. Bristus (talk) 00:36, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Additional sources
WhisperToMe (talk) 06:15, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Cortez, Marjorie. "ANDREWS DESERVES DEATH, MOTHER OF HI FI VICTIM SAYS" (Archive). The Deseret News. Saturday August 12, 1989.
 * Park, Loretta. "Ogden Hi-Fi murders still fresh memories for community, investigators" (Archive). Standard Examiner. Friday April 22, 2016. - Has photos of the deceased victims

NPOV issues
I think this article has NPOV issues because it has phrases like "Violence included kicking a pen into an ear and the brutal rape of a teenage girl who was later shot in the head. Or when it says "The hostages were also forced to drink a corrosive drain cleaner, causing horrific burns to their mouths and throats. --66.60.120.202 (talk) 19:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it could be phrased as "and the violent rape of a teenage girl", where violent means "violence more than necessary for the rape to proceed" or "above average amount of violence in rape cases". I don't see too much problem with "horrific burns to their mouths". It could be changed to "serious burns to their mouths", but horrific could express the common experience of most objective 3rd party; there is no need for emotionless writing. --Happyseeu (talk) 23:13, 26 April 2021 (UTC)