Talk:Peter Manuel

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 01:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 07:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Executed a psychopath

What is the relevance of Manuel being a psychopath? He was guilty of many murders. Such people are inevitably psychopaths. So is psychopathy a defence? I think not.JohnC (talk) 08:07, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Psychopathy is not a defence in this scenario. This is a code for a disordered personality not mental illness. This does not remove the person 's responsibility for their actions. It may help explain things a little but even then only scantily as this is a poor diagnostic category and one which often leads to tautological arguaments - he's a psychopath because he kills and he kills because he's a psychopath .. ad infinitem Gerpsych (talk) 20:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC) Definitely a sociopath, i.e: posessed of a hatred of society. Question: Did he argue 'Not guilty by reason of Insanity' at his trial? I remember reading his argument was that William Watt had committed the murders and that he had been framed by the police. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnRKillick (talk • contribs) 06:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Total killings

Manuel was officially convicted of 7 murders, and there are another 2 he is widely believed to have committed, but where does the figure of 18 killings come from? Who were the alleged victims? PatGallacher (talk) 21:49, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 October 2013

In the section referring to fictional mentions of Peter Manuel, the following should be added:

Peter Manuel, under the nickname "Sheriff Pete", features as a character in the novel "Dead Man and Broken Hearts" (2012) by Craig Russell. It is only at the very end of the novel that the character is named as Manuel and only then does the reader learn he was factual.

212.139.228.1 (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. (Note: it's Dead Men and Broken Hearts.) --Stfg (talk) 19:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Was it really necessary for this article to be semi-protected for several months? There has only been one vandalistic edit recently. PatGallacher (talk) 01:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, is there a clear distinction between which works should be listed under "literature" and which should be listed under "works cited and further reading". PatGallacher (talk) 23:32, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

My understanding is that the literature is cited, with distinctions. Some entries in the "further reading" section on this case may not have been cited within the article, but cover/mention the case here and there. The literature lists published works devoted solely to the Manuel case (or with chapters devoted solely to the case) as opposed to just mentioning or listing the case (or aspects of it) within works referencing many other cases. That qualifies as further reading on the case in published works not devoted solely to the case? The Nicol book, added to both sections, left red tag error messages reading "sfnp error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFNicol2008".--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:13, 27 May 2026 (UTC)