Talk:Let Him Have It

29 November 2006 edits
I have added more information to it, and later will add more. Aero Flame 12:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey! Why did you change what I said? Aero Flame 12:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I was editing at the same time you were. I'll merge the edits. EvilCouch 12:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks. Aero Flame 12:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. EvilCouch 13:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

4 December 2006 edits
No Problem. :) Aero Flame 19:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Btw, thanks for touching up the info I had added before. Also, I have added more info. Aero Flame 19:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

20 December 2006 edits
I have added a bit more info. Aero Flame 21:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC) There was a third person there that night that was never caught or mentioned by the police. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.189.58.195 (talk) 02:41, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup
Except for the first paragraph this article is entirely about the real event This should be pared down and more about the film added. To anyone who has access to the film and can accomplish this my thanks in advance.MarnetteD | Talk 21:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

The phrase

 * while the defence argued that he meant, "Give him the gun" which he in fact meant

Is that claim as to what he "in fact meant" verifiable? Especially since the next sentence suggests he never said it at all? If it means that's what he meant in the film, it could be clearer. 92.22.4.106 (talk) 15:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Can't be too many people visiting this page. The above two remarks sum up the sizable issues perfectly.KhProd1 (talk) 05:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

"There was a third member of the gang there the night of the crime, he was never caught or mentioned"
How can this be proved? If no one has ever mentioned it, and he was never caught, how can you know this is true? 87.114.158.135 (talk) 16:42, 13 November 2010 (UTC)