Jump to content

Talk:Laurie Bembenek

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edits

[edit]

I've done some editing on this article, partly to add detail and partly to fix some passages that were inappropriately POV. In particular:

  • The references to Bembenek's "seductive wardrobe" strike me as completely inappropriate. I've seen photos of Bembenek at her trial, and nothing she wore was unusually tight-fitting or skimpy. She wore full-length dress and rather conservative blouses. One of her outfits has been described as a "Victorian blouse" and is the item of clothing that jurors seemed to regard as manipulative. It is a white top with rather noticeable frills, and jurors apparently thought that she was dressing to make herself look "pretty and innocent." If that qualifies as a "seductive" outfit, then any dress worn by any attractive woman must also be seductive. In any case, the question of what she wore to trial has absolutely no probative value with regard to the question of whether she is guilty. Is it "manipulative" when male defendants wear suits and ties to court?
  • The claim that Schultz had not been raped is also contrary to evidence that has emerged following the original trial. According to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, December 9, 2003, "Elaine A. Samuels, who performed the Schultz autopsy, now says she believes the Schultz slaying was a 'sexual assault homicide' committed by a male. Samuels' change of heart resulted from new DNA testing that is detailed officially for the first time in a report Conen ordered unsealed Tuesday. The Oct. 3 report from Orchid Cellmark, a Nashville, Tenn., DNA testing laboratory, says male DNA was found on a vaginal swab collected from Schultz. ... The report says DNA from a different male was found on a comforter."
  • The claim that Bembenek pleaded no contest "due to massive public sympathy" is bizarre. The only reason that she had the opportunity to plead no contest is that a judicial review found errors in her original trial and gave her the right to a new trial. Public sympathy may have helped her win the right to retrial, but it certainly didn't determine how she decided to plead. Moreover, the previous wording left out all mention of the errors in her original trial, which implies a POV conclusion regarding her guilt.
  • No meaningful facts are added by including the phrase, "Like so many other killers," at the beginning of the sentence that states, "Bembenek has continued to insist she is innocent." The fact that many killers maintain their innocence has no bearing on the question of whether Bembenek's specific claim of innocence is credible.
  • It's very POV to state that Bembenek's supporters allege "a sinister Oliver Stone-like conspiracy within the Milwaukee Police Department." I doubt that Bembenek has ever met Oliver Stone, so what purpose is there in dragging his name into this article, other than to caricaturize and dismiss the opinions of her supporters?
  • It's also very POV to state that "even her staunchest supporters have never come up with a suspect who could have been the real killer. The guilty verdict at the trial still stands." In fact, Bembenek and her supporters have pointed to a couple of possible suspects who might have been the real killer. And the guilty verdict at the trial does not still stand. The verdict at her original trial was overturned, and the conviction that currently stands is based on her no contest plea as part of a plea bargain under which she specifically opted not to undergo a second trial. It's true that she remains legally convicted and considered guilty of the crime, but since that fact has already been made clear in this article, repeating it again at the end seems like rhetorical emphasis intended to hammer home a POV.

--Sheldon Rampton 22:52, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Name: Lawrencia or Laurencia or Laurie?

[edit]

The other day I changed the spelling in the first paragraph from Laurencia to Lawrencia to match the headline. I thought I was just fixing a typo. But now I think there should be a decision made on the name used in the headline.

According to all media sources, she goes by the name Laurie, so I think we should use that in the headline, even though she might have had a differnt name (either Lawrencia or Laurencia) at the time of her her trial. One thing that might support this change is that the TV channell A&E has done so in the title of their documentary: "American Justice: Hunting Bambi: The Laurie Bembenek Story" available on DVD (see http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=75918). A&E is a professional organisation and apparently they have no concern that people won't be able to find their product if they use the name Laurie. Also, her last name is sufficiently distinct that a web search or a Wikipedia search should turn up the right result. Finally, a redirection could be inserted for "Lawrencia Bembeneck." RUReady2Testify 22:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. She became well-known while actually named Lawrencia (I think, though it could be spelled with a U), and only officially changed her name to just Laurie later on in life. 165.176.123.2 (talk) 15:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous

[edit]

Who is Judy Zess? She is mentioned 3 times in the article, but it doesn't state who she is. pjh3000 20:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Background

[edit]

The Background section appears to be in random chronological order; as it currently stands, it doesn't seem to make sense. I don't know enough about the story to set it right. —QuicksilverT @ 23:24, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrenica Bembenek

[edit]

[1] What I would like to confirm is my late sister, Lawrencia Bembenek's, book WRITTEN ABOUT HER by Chris Radish. Laurie herself called this 'rushed-to-press' endeavor a 'literary abortion.' Why? The book is peppered with grammatical errors gone unheeded or corrected, the 'biography' is an opportunistic site written by an author who wormed her way into the good graces of my family, acquired her info, and after the book was published, didn't bother following up on 'plans' she had mentioned to Laurie. My family was left without a word fromColette Bembenek (talk) 22:13, 3 November 2016 (UTC) her, just a single Christmas card for that year, then silence.[reply]

I just wanted to let people know not to bother with Run,Bambi,Run [real original title - Not ] and read Laurie's own book, Woman on the Run. At least the info gleaned from Laurie's book is genuine. Thank you all for taking the time to read me 'speaking my onions.'

Colette Bembenek (talk) 22:13, 3 November 2016 (UTC)Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). Family[reply]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference undefined was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Laurie Bembenek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:42, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Laurie Bembenek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:35, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Employment in Thunder Bay

[edit]

"She also worked as a fitness instructor. "

She actually worked at Saint Josephs Care Group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.211.8.229 (talk) 20:45, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a documented source?Parkwells (talk) 03:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Molitor

[edit]

Are there references to the statement in this article that Paul Molitor had to leave the Brewers for Toronto as part of the plea deal involving drugs? I've searched and don't see information regarding this; I do see articles that he left because he wanted to make a change and win a World Series, which he did the year he joined Toronto, also winning MVP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.253.2 (talk) 01:45, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add name of victim and murder charge to Lead/Intro, plus more later

[edit]

Bembenek became notable only because of the "Murder of Christine Schultz". I thought Wikipedia policy was to avoid highlighting the perpetrator, even in cases where there were questions of guilt. Perhaps the murder should be the focus of this article, rather than Bembenek's bio. It may also be a way to better acknowledge some of the anomalies about the case.

Christine Schultz's name wasn't even mentioned in the Lead until I added it. There is very little about her or her family, who suffered losses with her murder. Who had custody of the sons after she died- her parents or Fred Schultz, the ex-husband who went to Florida? Have added the timing of divorces and marriages to the Intro. Also added subheaders. Parkwells (talk) 19:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Laurie_Bembenek&oldid=1218439620"