Jump to content

Talk:2025 New Orleans truck attack

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

Update needed for FBI findings (part 2)

[edit]

FBI's latest statements require updating paragraph about perpetrator identification. Multiple sources now confirm FBI's revised findings.

Proposed revision: "The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) identified the driver as Shamsud-Din Jabbar, an American-born resident of Houston, Texas. An Islamic State (ISIS) flag was found on the back of the truck. The FBI is investigating the attack as an act of terrorism and has confirmed the attacker acted alone.[7] While a vehicle explosion occurred at Trump International Hotel Las Vegas on the same day, the FBI has found "no definitive link" between the incidents.[8][9]"

Sources: - AP News (January 2, 2025): "The FBI says that the New Orleans attacker acted alone. The agency also finds 'no definitive link' to the truck explosion in Las Vegas." - WDSU (Updated 11:31 AM CST Jan 2, 2025): "New Orleans terror attack suspect acted alone, FBI says" confirms FBI's findings that Jabbar acted alone and no connection exists to Las Vegas incident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basaatw (talkcontribs)

This is an older post that was unsigned by a now blocked user. There is nothing substantial here that isn't already covered or addressed in the article. Nothing to do here. TiggerJay(talk) 02:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“Suspect”

[edit]

Jabbar was the guy who did it so shouldn’t it be changed from suspect to perpetrator? 66.65.59.229 (talk) 10:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that it has been legally confirmed by multiple sources, then yes. (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 12:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a presumption of innocence that prevails in these articles, until proven. WP:TOOSOON TiggerJay(talk) 15:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with using "suspect" for a while because of WP:BLP, which applies to the recently deceased. Usually I would expect "suspect" to give way to "convicted perpetrator", but in this case there won't be a trial for the deceased, so I am curious: What are the criteria in the case of a deceased suspect, and how do they officially become a perpetrator? Fluoborate (talk) 19:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever law enforcement calls him that and reliable sources report it, I think. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 22:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible it would transition to "attacker" or "assailant" or something similar. But for the most part it will follow what reliable sources are saying whenever that occurs in the process. That is largely driven by the investigation taking place. Among many reasons, some times things become discovered that a person identity was mistaken, or there was a bigger plot and this person was just a cog, or there are other suspicious circumstances where this person was essentially coerced into doing this act. I'm not making any assumptions about this incident, but rather commenting on examples that could drastically impact how this person is referred to in the future. TiggerJay(talk) 22:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say give it a month to let the dust settle and the fog of war clear before we stop extending standard WP:BLP protections to him as recently deceased. Simonm223 (talk) 18:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We might need to discuss that due to WP:BDP. --Super Goku V (talk) 10:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Super Goku V: What specific aspect of BDP are you asserting? TiggerJay(talk) 16:33, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably six months, one year, two years at the outside - I said "give it a month" which is shorter than the timeframes supported by WP:BDP. To clarify my stance, I said a month mainly to suggest we should not be acting sooner than a month from now. I am entirely happy to follow WP:BDP guidance and say we should treat the suspect as a BLP for at least six months. Simonm223 (talk) 16:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Simonm223 has pretty much already said what I would have. The only thing to emphasis is that this would be in line with the Such extensions would only apply particularly to contentious or questionable material about the subject that has implications for their living relatives and friends portion. --Super Goku V (talk) 05:57, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to Trump International Hotel Las Vegas Tesla Cybertruck explosion

[edit]

Under "Investigation," the article currently states an outdated belief from January 1, 2025 that the Cybertruck explosion killed the driver. However, local authorities stated on January 2, 2025 that the driver shot himself prior to the explosion. The county coroner confirmed that the driver's Cause of Death was suicide by gunshot. 2nucbom3ve (talk) 16:54, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed one sentence from the article, but there is no need to extensively cover it here except for basically a passing reference that it was investigated for being similar and that no connection was found. If the connection was still unknown then there might be cause for more detail. As it currently stands, it is accurate, and not outdated. TiggerJay(talk) 02:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it does not need to be extensively covered because no connection was found.
However, it is not accurate to say "The same day, at approximately 8:39 a.m., a Tesla Cybertruck exploded and caught fire outside of the Trump International Hotel Las Vegas in Paradise, Nevada, killing the perpetrator and injuring seven other people," because the Tesla exploding did not kill the perpetrator --- he killed himself with a gunshot to the head prior to the explosion.
The article should be simply corrected to: "The same day, at approximately 8:39 a.m., a Tesla Cybertruck exploded and caught fire outside of the Trump International Hotel Las Vegas in Paradise, Nevada, injuring seven other people. The perpetrator died from a self-inflicted gunshot prior to the explosion." 2nucbom3ve (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why anything is said about this as there doesn't appear to be any connection. Doesn't even look like the LV thing was designed to kill anyone other than the driver; and there were over 16,000 actual murders in the US last year. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]