Talk:Belgrade school shooting

Too young for WP:BLPCRIME due to Serbia's minimum age of criminal responsibility

A crime has not been committed under Serbian criminal statutes because culpability cannot be assigned to "children" as children are defined in those statutes (everyone under 14). Does this mean something with regard to including the "suspect's" (not a suspect in actuality as there is no crime) name? An editor has added the name to the infobox already. Multiple sources mention it including BBC.—Alalch E. 22:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

At the same time, WP:MINORS could have something to say about this.—Alalch E. 22:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Let's not include the name yet, and see how the dust settles. It's probably too complex an issue for an infobox at least. But first things first: People, stop stating that this person is guilty in Wikipedia's voice. Filling in the "perp" field is doing just that. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 22:53, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Saying that the 13 y.o. boy is a "perpetrator" or even suggesting that he could be culpable using a term such as "suspect" is a contradiction in terms, for legal reasons, as stated in the sources.—Alalch E. 23:05, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

About calling him the shooter or "alleged shooter": as there won't be a criminal proceeding with respect to the boy's actions, there won't ever be a determination by a court that he (and not someone else) did the shooting. The case is handled by the centre for social work in their capacity as a child welfare agency. They don't make legal determinations.—Alalch E. 23:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

"Alleged shooter"

Why does the article uses the wording "alleged shooter" when referring to the perpetrator? The crime was confessed and the shooter was publictly identified as Kosta Kecmanović, born 30 July 2009, by the authorities and the media. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.161.29.75 (talk) 16:09, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

See WP:INCOMPETENTS about not naming the boy. But at some point, it will become necessary to change "alleged shooter" to "shooter" pending consensus among editors, because nothing will happen officially that will render a finding of culpability, or something similar to that, such that it may establish that person X did Y in a way which surpasses the level of "official truth" that has already been established. Editors need to understand that, legally, nothing will happen in the future (there is nothing to wait for) with respect to such determinations about the boy. So it is only a matter of when to stop saying "alleged" (a few years from now?). Alternatively, it may be that the article will, for perpetuity, use the "alleged shooter" wording.—Alalch E. 16:25, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Let's imagine a future a hundred years from now. It would be unreasonable to say "alleged shooter" in 2123. At that time, the article will at the very least say "shooter". So we have defined point X (the present) and point Z (2123), and we need to define point Y: when should the change from "alleged shooter" to "shooter" occur? 2100? 2050? etc. I'm actually not joking. There is no defined standard to go by. In the realm of officialdom, this is case closed already (In Serbia, a 13-year-old boy is a priori not criminally culpable: no charges, no proceedings, no judgement, ever).—Alalch E. 16:34, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

seems pointless as he has been named by the Serbian gov't : https://minutovezpravy.cz/clanek/devet-mrtvych-14lety-kosta-syn-milovnika-zbrani-vrazdil-ve-skole/ HammerFilmFan (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Naming the suspect

Many news outlets, such as The Guardian, have named and even shared pictures of the suspect. Should we name him on the page, are there any policies surrounding this? Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 18:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree, however I don't believe naming the suspect is necessary until the trial has been concluded. Balkanite (talk) 19:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

He's too young to be tried. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 19:36, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

There will be a complete, official investigation, but no trial under Serbian law. He's been put into a mental hospital. HammerFilmFan (talk) 19:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

There won't be an investigation "against" the boy per the criminal procedure code as the boy is younger than fourteen, and such an investigation is always premised on there being a known or unknown individual whose action needs to be investigated so that the individual may be charged. This is a known individual who is not criminally responsible, so whatever investigation there is is not directed against him. There won't be such a "complete, official investigation" as you may think whereby a legal action or determination of some sort pertaining to the boy's actions will be made. The prosecutor's office doesn't mention any investigation (link). The "case" is referred to the centre for social work. —Alalch E. 20:31, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

(If you were to google translate that the word "investigation" would appear in the result, but it would not be an accurate translation. The key word to look for in the source language is "istraga" [cyr. истрага]; different from "inspection", "examination" etc.)—Alalch E. 21:27, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Basically the announcement says that an on-scene inspection was conducted (by the police, obviously), that blood was sampled for a drug test (there is reportedly a negative result), and that the authorities have been looking into the motive. No criminal investigation targeting the boy.—Alalch E. 21:32, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

WP:BLPCRIME and WP:BLPNAME would be the closest applicable policy points I'm aware of. In general where there's serious privacy concerns over a living person, the BLP policy as a whole requires us to err on the side of caution with what content we include in an article. That the alleged shooter was under the age of criminal responsibility in Serbia would not prevent BLPCRIME from applying, as that policy point also covers investigations and arrests that do not rise to a conviction. Sideswipe9th (talk) 04:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

There is a criminal investigation directed at the father (link) as he is suspected of having endangered the public (in some way, no further information has been provided) which is a separate criminal offense, dissimilar to murder, and can result in a maximum 12-year imprisonment. This is not parental vicarious liability. It is about what the father did or failed to do of his own accord. It will result in some action or lack thereof only against the father and will not end with some kind of a legal conclusion about the boy.—Alalch E. 08:07, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

@Azumibox named the suspect five times in the last three days. I have gave him a Vandalism1 notice. --DragonFederal (talk) 11:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Azumischoolshootings, who also did the same edits and nothing else prior he was blocked, has a similar username. They might be the same person. --DragonFederal (talk) 11:45, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I'd bet the proverbial farm on it. Regards   Aloha27  talk  15:30, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

There was an IP editor who added the name earlier today, Dark4tune also added it to the infobox. Dark4tune please do not add this name again. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:49, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I have added FAQ template with the suspect naming question due to a lot of changes on that issue. Please feel free to improve it here: Talk:Belgrade school shooting/FAQ. --DragonFederal (talk) 08:32, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

@DragonFederal Yo, I am a mass shooting reasercher, I am wondering why shouldn't we name the suspect? I know his name. And normally shooting pages have a Perpetrator section but this page doesn't. Also you added the wrong weapons. I am from Croatia which is the neighbouring country of Serbia, I have friends from there who were in the school at the moment of the shooting. Please reply. Activeshooterscenario (talk) 09:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

i personally agree with you on not naming the suspect (kosta kecmanovic), many news outlets have also shared the name of him and pictures of him and reasons mentioned above RossoSPC (talk) 01:14, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

also he probably won't be convincted in a court of law until he is 18. RossoSPC (talk) 01:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Activeshooterscenario. Most likely shooting pages that have a Perpetrator section are those where shooters died during incidents. If a shooter survives we have WP:BLPCRIME. By a definition, a perpetrator is someone who committed a crime or/and suspect of committing a crime. Due to the Serbia's minimum age of criminal responsibility the shooter in this case was to young to commit a crime, also see WP:INCOMPETENTS. Furthermore, regarding weapons I did't add it to the article, you have references at Belgrade school shooting#Shooting that supports what is mentioned in the Infobox. If you have WP:Reliable sources that states otherwise please share it. Also, be aware of WP:NOR if you say that you have friends who were in the school at the moment of the shooting. --DragonFederal (talk) 05:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@DragonFederal I know all of that, also for the example you have the 1997 Thurston High School Shooting, 2017 Douglas Stoneman Marjory High School Shooting and the 1974 Sofia Massacre where the perpetrators didn't die but they still have a Perpetrator section on the Wiki Page, also I don't understand why shouldn't we name the suspect. If he's not considered a Perpetrator then let's make an Assailant section since he's referred as an Assailant. Activeshooterscenario (talk) 09:41, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Activeshooterscenario. To fully understand why we do not name the suspect you have to understand WP:BLPCRIME and WP:INCOMPETENTS as well as that due to the Serbia's minimum age of criminal responsibility the shooter in Belgrade shooting was to young to commit a crime. If there is no crime there is no suspect. Furthermore, we usually titled perpetrators after trials and their convictions. What will be in two or five years from now with the shooter from Belgrade shooting we don't know it yet. Have to wait. --DragonFederal (talk) 10:30, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@DragonFederal So you are saying we have to wait until he turns 14? Activeshooterscenario (talk) 10:34, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

The perpetrator is 14 now, media states july 30 2009 is his birthday RossoSPC (talk) 08:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

ok, so can we name him and make a perpetrator section??/ Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 10:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

we can RossoSPC (talk) 10:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

hes been 14 for 6 months and people keep censoring his name from the page? Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 10:36, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

yeah because the trial for both the parents and kosta wasnt completed RossoSPC (talk) 10:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Why do we have to wait until his parents’ trial is over to add his name (Kosta doesn’t have a trial because he was below the age of criminal responsibility)? And why should his name not be on Wikipedia if major news sources have already reported it? MountainDew20 (talk) 04:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

basically, from what im hearing, we're following a bunch of technicalities on why we cant name kosta. I think its quite stupid but apparantly its just wikipedia rules. Idk if we'll ever be able to name him on here Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 08:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@DragonFederalso basically there will never be a time we can name Kosta on here?? because there will never be a trial for him. Take the Santa fe shooter for example. He's an adult now but will still be tried as a minor because he did it when he was 17. Kosta will never be charged for his crimes so will there be a time when we can mention his name on this article?? Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 15:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

@Elizzaflanagan221, @RossoSPC It's not a censorship, because the English-language Wikipedia has a WP:BLPCRIME policy, stating that a living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Furthermore, there is a WP:INCOMPETENTS policy, which also follows the Serbian law which states that he, as a 13-year-old, could not face criminal or misdemeanour charges due to the Law on juvenile offenders and criminal-law protection of juveniles setting the minimum age of criminal responsibility at 14. Basically, it means that his name will not be mentioned in this article because the shooter is not the preparator de jure. --DragonFederal (talk) 07:21, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

I did not get that, Thanks for explaining! RossoSPC (talk) 12:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

War trophies

@Dark4tune wants to change this sentence in the 'Background' section:

"Along with a culture of gun ownership and many households keeping war trophies from the 20th-century wars, illegal weapons became widespread in some of the region's countries following the Yugoslav Wars in the 1990s." (Special:PermanentLink/1156777852)

to this:

"Along with a culture of gun ownership, illegal weapons became widespread in many Balkan countries following the Yugoslav Wars in the 1990s." (Special:Diff/1156684595)

He, for some reason, citing ambiguity and a need for clarification, as well as claiming to have improved grammar (but I don't understand what could be ambiguous here, and clearly it isn't about grammar), objects the part which mentions war trophies. But this is historically one of the big reasons why there have been many guns in Serbia. The claim is supported by a source. I oppose removing this item of background information.—Alalch E. 15:54, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

@Alalch E., I would gladly let you revert my edit, if you could make this statement more specific. First of all, what kind of war trophies have these households kept? If it is referring to guns, it should be mentioned in the statement. Second, which wars of the 20th century? The Yugoslav Wars happened in the 20th century, and they've already been mentioned. If the statement is referring to the world wars, then they should also be mentioned. The source you are referring to must have more information than what is provided. Thus, I suggest reading more closely and fixing the article so I don't have to erase part of it. Thank you. Dark4tune (talk) 04:09, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

It is referring to guns, that does not need to be additionally specified. Wars other than the Yugoslav wars, roughly the past 100 years. For additional sources, not already in the article, see this BBC article („Ratovi u poslednjih 100 godina doveli su građane u uverenje da treba da drže naoružanje, kako bi se zaštitili u slučaju novog sukoba", kaže Petrović. Ocenjuje da su česti sukobi tokom proteklog stoleća doprineli razvoju „kulture naoružavanja".) and this 021.rs article (Prema njenim rečima, od vrste oružja u legalnom posedu, najčešće su predati pištolji. Kada je reč o nelegalnom oružju predavano je čak i ono koje potiče iz Prvog i Drugog svetskog rata. [illegal WWI- and WWII-era guns have been surrendered during the firearms amnesty]). It didn't start in the 1990s, far, far, from it.—Alalch E. 12:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

There you go, you just provided a source that mentions "illegal WWI- and WWII-era guns". I think that would be much more specific than "war trophies of the 20th century wars". I suggest you clarify that sentence. If you don't, then I will. Dark4tune (talk) 15:52, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I've added the additional sources, and made the change.—Alalch E. 18:24, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

The first

This source says this was the first school shooting in that country. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/15/girl-wounded-in-serbia-school-shooting-dies-becoming-10th-victim#:~:text=Country%27s%20first%20school%20shooting%20on%20May%203%20causes%20national%20mourning%20and%20protests.&text=A%20girl%20has%20died%20nearly,of%20the%20tragedy%20in%20Belgrade. Cwater1 (talk) 20:39, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cwater1 There was an attempted school shooting in Velika Plana and two shots were fired, nobody got injured or died because of the teacher's quick reaction time. I dont know if this is considered a school shooting but it happened 3-4 years before this tragedy. Activeshooterscenario (talk) 09:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Cited policies for not including the name

How can WP:BLPCRIME apply if there is no court case against him at all? In pretty much every single case where the mass killer didn't kill themselves/wasn't killed by law enforcement, we DID name them - the word "accused" and not the "perpetrator" was used in the infobox until they were sentenced. Since there will never be a sentence here, we could use the word "assailant". And WP:INCOMPETENTS is NOT a policy, as the FAQ wrongly stated before I removed it half an hour ago - therefore it is not compulsory to follow it. TVShowFan122 (talk) 23:19, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I just added the name of shooter. If Wikipedia:INCOMPETENTS is indeed not a policy, and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons cannot be applied due to lack of criminal responsibility, then all arguments against naming him are exhausted. In addition, when I proposed omitting perpetrators names at certain places, I was told Wikipedia is encyclopedia that can contain potentially sensitive content. That can be used as an argument for adding a name. Kecmanović was already named by many news agencies, and he has been named on pages on other languages. So, in my mind, that question has been settled in favour of naming the shooter. Space2006 (talk) 14:04, 3 August 2024 (UTC)