| Revision as of 00:06, 6 October 2017 editInternetArchiveBot (talk | contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers5,388,415 edits Notification of altered sources needing review #IABot (v1.5.4)← Previous edit |
Revision as of 00:40, 6 October 2017 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,311,118 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Franjo Tuđman/Archive 3) (botNext edit → |
| Line 44: |
Line 44: |
|
Furthermore, it is written in some kind of broken English. |
|
Furthermore, it is written in some kind of broken English. |
|
Why does it not instead emphasise the importance of this individual in Croatia's independence, and in leading his nation through war? |
|
Why does it not instead emphasise the importance of this individual in Croatia's independence, and in leading his nation through war? |
|
|
|
|
==Joint criminal enterprise== |
|
|
Please remove the passage starting with "In May 2013, the ICTY, found that Tuđman had been the leader of the joint criminal enterprise" as this was found not to be true (speaking about icty finding). The appeals chamber had found that “he Trial Chamber made no explicit findings concerning participation in the JCE and did not find them guilty of any crimes" . If not removed, new content should be added by reporting what the appeals chamber had found. I'm pinging all participants of the upper discussion. {{ping|Peacemaker67}} {{ping|GregorB}} {{ping|Tzowu}} {{ping|Comatmebro}} {{ping|Rms125a@hotmail.com}} {{ping|Cwobeel}} {{ping|Zezen}} {{ping|Aircorn}} {{ping|Jack Upland}} {{ping|United Union}}. I was also involved as the only ip that had provided a comment (54.163.189.221). Also see this ] (]) 13:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:'''Comment'''. I'd agree with removing the said passage for the same reasons I gave in the earlier RfC, but not for the reason stated above. The appeals chamber stated that “he Trial Chamber made no explicit findings concerning participation in the JCE and did not find them guilty of any crimes", but - if I understand correctly - this is a ''factually incorrect statement'', because the Trial Chamber did precisely that. Miseticlaw.blogspot.hr sees this as a ''legal opinion'', but I don't think it's legally possible to overturn the first degree verdict in an ''amicus curiae'' application ruling. This is a legal conundrum of sorts - IANAL, so I can only say that things seem illogical; apart from that, miseticlaw.blogspot.hr has a vested interest in interpreting the ruling in a particular way, and is therefore not a reliable secondary source. ] (]) 13:51, 25 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: {{ping|GregorB}} The ICTY found ''"that Tuđman was a key member of the joint criminal enterprise and that he intended to repopulate the Krajina with Croats. Other members of the joint criminal enterprise included Gojko Šušak, who was the Minister of Defence and a close associate of Tuđman’s, Zvonimir Červenko, the Chief of the Croatian army Main Staff. The members of the joint criminal enterprise also included others in the Croatian political and military leadership who participated in Presidential meetings and were close associates of Tuđman’s"'' (see ) ] 15:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::::And now we have the appeals chamber saying that “he Trial Chamber made no explicit findings concerning participation in the JCE and did not find them guilty of any crimes". ] (]) 15:59, 25 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Sorry, it was pointed out to my attention that the upper quote does not come from the trial judgement. I reviewed your source. This quote comes from a press release from 2011 Gotovina trials (which was later overturned). The source I had posted comes from the appeals chamber to Prlic and others, where some (including this article) had written that that trials chamber had found Tudjman a part of JCE. Now we have the appeals chamber findings. ] (]) 16:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:Interesting, I didn't see this news. The Croatian Ministry has the same view on this decision of the Appeals Chamber: . ] (]) 17:58, 25 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*Removing edit request template. IP appears blocked and other editors who can edit the page are discussing the topic. ] ] 01:33, 27 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:'''Comment'''. Why have the editors not yet either removed the references to the Trial Chamber's comments about Tudjman, or else allowed the quote from the Appeals Chamber to stand? The Appeals Chamber is the higher court. If it made an express conclusion that the Trial Chamber made no such findings about Tudjman, then the high court's findings should be included on Wiki as a counterpoint, in fairness. It is not for Misplaced Pages editors to censor the point because it believes that the higher court made a "factually incorrect statement". ] <!--Template:Undated--><small class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 18:00, 8 October 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== External links modified == |
|
== External links modified == |
Why does the lead section contain a ICTY verdict, as if that is the thing he will be remebered in history?
Furthermore, it is written in some kind of broken English.
Why does it not instead emphasise the importance of this individual in Croatia's independence, and in leading his nation through war?
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Structure: criterion met
