Talk:David Justin Freeman

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... Cut me some slack here. I just started this thing and I'm working on getting some references together. Sheesh. It'll look better in a few hours. --Justinblack (talk) 18:02, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

"False" arrest

What makes an arrest false? This has been deleted more than once, so let's discuss. I believe this could be legitimately labeled as false because 1) the original warrant was invalid. 2) The judge dismissed the original charges and 3) the conviction was overturned by the GA Supreme Court. I understand that some are concerned that the wording goes against the 'neutral point of view' but I don't see that as a valid argument. If something is false then regardless of who that statement supports, whether the police or the individual, it is what it is. What more evidence do we need in order to call it a false arrest? MoniqueMaple (talk) 02:03, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

A reliable source referring to it as a false arrest? —ADavidB 03:19, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

If the Supreme Court overturns the conviction, then it is a false arrest. The Supreme Court determined that the arrest should not have happened to begin with because what Freeman did was not illegal. That is the reliable source.

I checked the links on the site and see that the Supreme Court has archived the documents regarding this case. I'm currently working on updating those links. MoniqueMaple (talk) 12:05, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

@MoniqueMaple: Given that you have a CoI in this article's subject, it would be best that you not be currently working on updating those links. You're better off discussing it on the article's talk page and allowing an uninvolved editor to do it. ButlerBlog (talk) 23:12, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Go for it: https://law.justia.com/cases/georgia/supreme-court/2017/s17a1040.html MoniqueMaple (talk) 00:35, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with WP:NPOV. It has to do with the fact that just because a conviction is overturned does not in and of itself qualify the arrest as false (or technically, wrongful). False or wrongful arrests are specific in their definition and it's not simply "my charges were overturned/dismissed in court". If the Supreme Court overturns the conviction, then it is a false arrest. Not necessarily. There are other criteria. ButlerBlog (talk) 23:33, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

What is the specific definition? What is the other criteria? MoniqueMaple (talk) 00:34, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Upon further research, the most convincing aspect of the false arrest was that the initial warrant was invalid. They had an invalid warrant and therefor the arrest was unlawful. That seems pretty clear cut to me. MoniqueMaple (talk) 00:38, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

If we don't have a citable source that calls it a false arrest, then we don't call it a false arrest. We don't do original research. We summarize what secondary sources say about it. ButlerBlog (talk) 01:05, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

(addendum...) There are too many primary sources in this article (easily more than half). It really needs to be cited primarily by secondary sources. Court documents are primary sources. The personal and church web sites are primary sources, although if used judiciously, they can be said to meet reliability requirements (see WP:SELFSOURCE). However, if used (and they are in this article), they should be used sparingly; relying on too many would raise the question as to whether this subject meets WP:GNG. Notability is established by coverage in independent sources (i.e. WP:SECONDARY), so there needs to be more of that. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:19, 6 September 2025 (UTC)