Talk:Murder of Breck Bednar

IPCC report
There is now an IPCC report into "Surrey Police Contact Centre's response to grooming concerns raised by Ms LaFave". There is a date at the end of the main part of 16 July 2015 but I don't think it was published until 20 November 2015. There is also a newspaper article on the subject.

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/investigation_commissioner_reports/BEDNAR%20FINAL%20REDACTED%20REPORT.pdf

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/ipcc-calls-lessons-be-learnt-grooming-following-murder-breck-bednar

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3329394/Police-call-handler-saved-son-sex-killer.html

Perhaps someone could go through the report and add any key things that stand out to the article. Kookiethebird (talk) 01:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

-

What was the motive for the murder? the article doesn't say. David Rayner.

Omission
I saw that docu last night, pretty shocking. What I missed was how the murderer could be unemployed and afford a flat, a server, regular electricity and the like, plus a taxi fare. Would Welfare really fund this all? He lied about all sorts of things but he survived too well on being unemployed - did not compute. 58.174.193.4 (talk) 04:27, 8 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I saw that programme and it was very powerful (although it could have done without the few seconds of the police officers pretending as if they were investigating when being filmed). Regarding the flat the murderer lived in, that was owned by his grandparents, according to one of the sources in the article:


 * http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/murdered-breck-bednars-mum-wants-4695344


 * Kookiethebird (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

English?
If both his parents were US citizens who moved to the UK before Breck was born, what exactly makes Breck "English"? So far as I'm aware, having been born in the UK, under British nationality law it would potentially make him British, but not specifically English.--82.21.97.70 (talk) 14:08, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Being born in England might do it? But we currently don't know where he was born. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:14, 14 November 2019 (UTC)


 * You say "might" do it. But what is it that qualifies someone as being English? Surely that is only ancestry, as it's an ethnic group identified largely by genetics? Being British is the same - with the exception that British is also a nationality that people can adopt, if successful. Can a person become English? One might ask if a person can become Chinese also, for example. Certainly, China is also a nation state with a specific nationality. But can a person become ethnically Chinese? Currently there is no specific documentation such as a passport which denotes whether someone is English. However, in contrast, there is a procedure by which people can become British and thus have a British passport. With regard to this specific victim of murder and torture, we don't know whether or not he was even entitled to British citizenship or not. We do know that his parents came to live in the UK 17 years ago, and that the boy was born less than 17 years ago. However, nationality laws in the UK changed in 1983 or so, so I don't know if it's the case anymore that anyone born in the UK automatically gains British citizenship.


 * My instinct would be to change the information in the article to suggest that he was British, from England, rather than English. Even then, we could do with a citation. --82.21.97.70 (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2019 (UTC)


 * My instinct would be to first try and find out where he was born. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC)


 * He was from England. That's what made him English, that's what makes anyone English.Brattice (talk) 14:35, 30 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Just living in England makes anyone English? I think that might be open to challenge. Martinevans123 (talk)
 * Not "just living in" England, being from England. No-one but a racial extremist would challenge that, and none of the sources suggest he was from anywhere other than England.Brattice (talk) 15:11, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't think racism has anything to do with anything that has been said here. Ethnicity, nationality and citizenship do. I challenged it, and I do not for one instant consider myself racist. However, I am a stickler for accuracy and defined terms. Unfortunately, it seems that 'English' is actually ill-defined by many. As I suggested earlier, to be properly English, one would need to be ethnically English. Again, ethnicity can be ill-defined also. So aboriginal then? It isn't necessarily a particularly easy thing to define for a scholarly or encyclopaediac article. That is, of course, why I didn't just go ahead and change the article, but rather offered it up for discussion. Personally, I'm happy enough at the outcome. Thanks for coming to a civil discussion and resolving this. --82.21.97.70 (talk) 21:56, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Not wanting to get too metaphysical here, but what do you mean by "being from" exactly? Presumably not just residing there. I would tend to agree with you about the sources; except they may say nothing because they simply don't know. By the way, I don't see "English / not English" as necessarily always being a real or useful dichotomy.Martinevans123 (talk) 15:34, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how much more simply I can put it, but when you've lived in a place your entire life - irrespective of whether your parents happened to be on holiday somewhere else at the moment of your birth - that's the place your from. If he also held US citizenship through his parents and the sources mentioned it, that would be worth mentioning, but it wouldn't make him from America.Brattice (talk) 15:44, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It would make him a British/American duel national, wouldn't it? But that may be a different question, if we agree that English is not a "nationality"? We have a source that says he lived there all his life? Or even one that describes him as "English"? Is the fact that he may have been specifically English, rather than just British, somehow significant? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * We don't agree that English is not a nationality, a nationality is exactly what it is. If you're used to nation-states the idea of nationality not being the same as citizenship may seem odd to you, but the UK is not a nation-state. No-one is "just British".Brattice (talk) 16:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, so we have the important distinction between citizenship and nationality. That would affect what would appear in an infobox. Meanwhile... Martinevans123 (talk) 16:03, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You're talking as if some formal rule or consensus existed about whether people should be referred to by their citizenship or their nationality in article introductions in cases where these differ. No such rule or consensus exists. Some articles describe people as British/Soviet/etc., others describe people as English/Russian/etc. I'm not arguing for a change: all I'm saying is that the current wording is fine and is supported by the existing sources without the need for additional citations.Brattice (talk) 16:16, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I believe there are strict rules as to what goes in any infobox. But as for the text, I'm just asking why it's there at all. The first source to follow it is that BBC one which says nothing about him being English, It does say "of Caterham, Surrey", so maybe that's enough. But why do we not also describe Daynes as "English" as the same source say he's "of Rosebery Road, Grays"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:30, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting the first sentence should read simply, "Breck Bednar (17 March 1999 – 17 February 2014) was a 14-year-old boy who was murdered by 18-year-old Lewis Daynes."?Brattice (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm suggesting that would be perfectly acceptable. Alternatively, that he's described as "a 14-year-old British boy", since the exact geographical location of his residence doesn't matter for the lead. Or, if it does matter, it would be better to follow the source and say he was "a 14-year-old boy from Caterham, in Surrey, UK." Martinevans123 (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think those would all be acceptable, but a compelling reason to prefer any of them to the existing wording, which has been stable for more than a year, is lacking. Forced to express a preference, I would say that since the title of the article is "Murder of Breck Bednar" and not "Breck Bednar", the whole sentence should be recast along the lines of "The Murder of Breck Bednar took place on the 17th of February, 2014, at a flat in Rosebery Road in Grays, Essex. Bednar, a a 14-year-old boy from Caterham, Surrey, was killed by 18-year-old Lewis Daynes. Bednar knew Daynes only through online gaming and had never met him in person until he visited Daynes's flat on the day of the murder."Brattice (talk) 18:32, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That sounds perfectly reasonable. I think that revision would be a great improvement. As a summary of the entire article, I think the outcome for Daynes should also be included. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:20, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Done and done.Brattice (talk) 17:58, 5 February 2020 (UTC)