Talk:Robert Bales

Sergeant Robert Bales article

There was an article named Sergeant Robert Bales. It has been deleted by now, but you can still take a look at it via Google Cache. See here. I haven't read it, but thought I'd drop a note, just in case it contains some valuable information that is not included in this article, yet. (Lord Gøn (talk) 23:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC))

There is no need to use Google Cache. The information from the Sergeant Robert Bales article were copied and pasted from the Alleged perpetrator section of the Kandahar massacre article, where it still could be accessed.--Potorochin (talk) 04:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

He is correct 2601:19C:4280:1F20:5D84:DD1:E925:317A (talk) 10:39, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Charge date

The article says Bales was charged on March 22. The news stories I saw said he would be charged on March 23. See:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jALBPqqvg4zf_EEzxaAXr0gZqFuQ?docId=8d9eadebbf724854a7fb077990020c48

Sca (talk) 12:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

No Purple Heart?

If he suffered injuries to his foot and a traumatic brain injury while deployed, why is the purple heart not listed among his medals? Was he never awarded it or is its omission from the medal list an error? -Mike Payne (T • C) 23:50, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Unknown at this time. If the injuries were from accidents that occurred on duty in the combat zone, but were not caused by enemy action, then the purple heart would not have been awarded. AzureCitizen (talk) 23:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

You do not automatically get the purple heart because of injury. Per the Good Conduct Metal authority (AGCM) any persons can be denied medals and/or stripped of existing ones. The PH award is something that must include at least two recommendations from persons in his/her chain of command. badboyjamie talk 07:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion to redirect to Kandahar massacre article

I don't really understand why there should be a Wikipedia article on this person. His only real notability seems to be as the alleged perpetrator of the Kandahar massacre. My understanding of Wikipedia policy is that there should not need to be an article on Bales, just as there is no article on Adam Lanza of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, Michael Kenneth McLendon of the Geneva County massacre, or Jiverly Wong of the Binghamton shootings. (On the other hand, I notice that there are articles for James Eagan Holmes of the 2012 Aurora shooting, Martin Bryant of the Port Arthur massacre, and Anders Behring Breivik of the 2011 Norway attacks.) —BarrelProof (talk) 17:27, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, there never seems to a clear standard for these types of things. I think this article would be better off as part of the main article, but I really don't care that much. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:27, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I found a relevant policy page: WP:BIO1E. Its guidance is not 100% clear-cut, but may support having an article on Bales, since it says "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." —BarrelProof (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I might add that, though there is only one mention of Mefloquine in this article, there is ongoing research about the drug's neurotoxicity. It is quite possible that research advances in the decades to come may change Bales' life.Pcvjamaica (talk) 18:19, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Fort Leavenworth?

The sources in the article and online are suggesting he's at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, not Leavenworth. The trial is at Lewis-McChord, and he was at the trial so I think that information is just out of date. - SudoGhost 04:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I found a reference that does verify that he was transferred to Lewis-McChord, so I went ahead and updated the article. - SudoGhost 04:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:American fraudsters

The article states that Bales was found liable of fraud, complete with a reference citation. Thus, should the category "Category:American fraudsters" be added to the article in light of this? Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 13:25, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

EDIT: Added category. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 21:25, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Status as a soldier

As part of the court-martial proceedings, Bales was reduced in rank to E-1, forfeited all pay and benefits, dishonorably discharged, and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Because of the dishonorable discharge (which is routine in cases like this), he is no longer a soldier but instead a federal prison inmate. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 12:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

The lede is supposed to reflect the article, and nothing in the article or in any sources support this change. I could find no sources saying that they discharged Bales. He was demoted to E-1 and faces a dishonorable discharge, but until that discharge happens in some way it's inaccurate to change the lede to suggest that he has been discharged. - Aoidh (talk) (formerly User:SudoGhost) 12:25, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Here are three that say he was discharged: 1, 2, 3. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 12:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

The sentence included a dishonourable discharge as part of the sentencing. Civilians do not go to Leavenworth; going to Leavenworth does not mean he is a "federal prison inmate", he is a DoD prison inmate, as Leavenworth is a military prison under the United States Department of Defense. I'm going to have to look into it more, but typical inmates at Leavenworth are not discharged from the military until they are released from Leavenworth nor does their sentence count towards their service, but I don't know how that works for life sentences. It looks like there's a lot of confusion in the press regarding the dishonorable discharge aspect of the sentence and not just for this individual; there's a lot of contradictory reports about other trials as well, so I'm going to try to find a clear answer on this. - Aoidh (talk) (formerly User:SudoGhost) 13:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

(For editors who might have followed this thread) Aoidh and I carried on our conversation elsewhere and came to the conclusion that Bales is neither discharged immediately nor discharged at the end of his prison term; instead, he'll be discharged in due course after legal review. Here's a more robust restatement of the process for anyone who is interested: in keeping with 10 USC § 871(c), execution of the order that Bales be dishonorably discharged is temporarily stayed pending an automatic appeal to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals (ACCA) where the discharge will be reviewed along with the prison term. Hypothetically, that decision could then be appealed under discretionary review to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF). During this process, however, Bales will remain a Private/E-1 incarcerated at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth and will be what AR 190-47 Chapter 3-1 calls a "sentenced prisoner" after the convening authority approves the confinement portion of his sentence. Later, after review of the dishonorable discharge is complete by the ACCA (and the CAAF, potentially), the dishonorable discharge will be executed and he will become what AR 190-47 calls a "discharged prisoner" (not discharged from prison, but discharged from the military). At that time, instead of being an incarcerated Private/E-1, Bales will become a discharged former soldier serving a life sentence at a military prison. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 23:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Given the conflicted media sourcing saying Bales was given a dishonorable discharge and the technicalities of the process, I've made this edit to solve the problem that readers and editors may become confused over whether the article should read "Bales is a soldier" or "Bales is a former soldier". Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 23:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with AzureCitizen's assessment.. I also struck certain things above that I wrote that were inaccurate; the USDB at Leavenworth is an atypical DoD prison meant for more serious offenders that aren't exactly going to be going back to their units afterwards. Changing "soldier" to "Staff Sergeant" was also a good move, since there's no question that it's factually accurate and also makes a more concise lede. - Aoidh (talk) (formerly User:SudoGhost) 04:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Reader feedback requested religion

Is this sufficient to say he is Christian? It's an opinion piece. Biosthmors (talk) 22:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

No, I don't think it is. It only says that he is "is apt to be seen..." as a "...white Christian-American soldier", not that he is one. - Aoidh (talk) (formerly User:SudoGhost) 15:45, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the "apt to be seen" reason. Depending where you go, Obama is still apt to be seen as a Muslim. Also, the term "Christian-American" is a little puzzling. Is this simply someone who is both Christian and American, or an American with Christian heritage (like African-American)? Can't remember ever seeing it phrased like this, and Google completely disregards the hyphen, so not much help there. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:57, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Value of his home questioned

I find the following a bit hard to believe: "The Bales family was struggling financially and had put its home up for sale three days before the shootings.[48] The property was listed for $229,000, approximately $50,000 less than what they paid for it in 2005, and less than what they owed the bank."

How in the world could a Sergeant afford a $279,000.00 house? Also, the citation for the reference points to an article in the Telegraph that doesn't show a "source" for their information.—  VoiceOfreasonVoiceOfreason   21:53, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

With regard to the article, it appears the "source" is the real estate agent Mrs. Bales had contacted previously about selling the home (a Mr. Philip Rodocker). With regard to a Staff Sergeant's income potential, his base pay (E-6 over 10) plus allowances for housing with dependents plus subsistence plus hazardous duty pay would be around $60,000 per year, plus since he was in a war zone his salary would have been U.S. income tax free, so that would be the equivalent of more than $80,000. Provided Mrs. Bales also may have been working, they have been able to barely afford monthly house payments if they kept their other expenses down, but the article also says that they were falling behind in their payments when they decided they should try to sell it. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 22:15, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll see if I can contact Mr. Rodocker but don't have very high hopes. I think this may have been some sensationalism at best.—  VoiceOfreasonVoiceOfreason   22:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

What specifically is the issue with the two sentences listed above? A secondary source has been provided, so it is verifiable for Wikipedia's purposes. Can you articulate what the problem is? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 23:37, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Because I think it's a lie and if it is then it shouldn't be on Wikipedia. Do you have a different thought on that logic?—  VoiceOfreasonVoiceOfreason   14:57, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Have a look at this New York Times article (Rodocker statements are down aways), plus this Bloomberg news article. After you've had the chance to read those, perhaps you could specify what you perceive the exact "lie" to be and why? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 15:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Awards revoked?

Someone recently deleted his awards list, claiming he lost them along with the rest of his status. While this definitely can happen (and officially should), I can't find anything explicitly saying it did in this case. Regardless, the list should stay, because history doesn't cease to exist, but a "Revoked" note would be appropriate, if a source is found saying as much. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:43, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you. Until facts can be found that this is final, it is only speculations and should not be removed based on that.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:47, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

You reverted it at the same time I did. I didn't get an edit conflict, but my summary ceased to exist in the edit history. Ironic. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:50, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

LOL, weird.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Do you think it should be completely deleted, if sourced, or just noted as revoked? InedibleHulk (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Difficult to say, depending on the source quality. But for now I say lets keep it and not think about it until someone with an interest to delete it finds a source to prove its point. I think the information is useful as of today atleast.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, gives a wider picture of the guy, over time. Murderers seem to always be remembered for the murder part. They should be, of course, but not exclusively. I usually don't care for citation needed tags, but I think I'll note these were revoked alongside one. It'll spur someone who digs deeper than I do (I go with the first Google page, then one of the easily clickable nine), will deny the guy bragging rights (presuming he can point to Wikipedia where he is) and is probably (by my gut and reading of the law) true. Couldn't hurt. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:48, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

@BabbaQ:, @InedibleHulk: Sorry for bringing up an almost year-old discussion but this edit brought my attention to it. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (PDF) says that "Award of badges may be revoked under any of the following conditions..Combat or special skill badge. An award of any combat or special skill badge will be automatically revoked on dismissal, dishonorable discharge, or conviction by courts-martial for desertion in wartime (wartime is defined in the glossary)." That regulation says that it's automatic upon a condition that Bales met when he was dishonorably discharged[1]. Should this be mentioned in the awards and decorations section, or is that not a sufficient source? - Aoidh (talk) 04:45, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Not every rule that's meant to be enforced actually is, so best to not presume it was. But it eems fine to mention these circumstances in that section, and let readers presume for themselves. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:30, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Robert Bales

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Robert Bales's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "NYT":

• From Kansas: Eder, Richard (June 17, 1976). "A Boy and His Dog". The New York Times.
• From Afghanistan conflict (1978–present): Bearak, Barry (24 July 2007). "Mohammad Zahir Shah, Last Afghan King, Dies at 92". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 11 June 2017.
• From National Journal: Jeremy W. Peters (October 24, 2010). "Debut for a Nimbler, Newsier National Journal". The New York Times. Retrieved December 1, 2010.
• From MSNBC: Cable Channel Nods to Ratings and Leans Left Archived February 15, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. The New York Times. Published on November 6, 2007. Retrieved August 24, 2008.
• From Kandahar massacre: Taimoor Shah; Graham Bowley (11 March 2012). "U.S. Sergeant Is Said to Kill 16 Civilians in Afghanistan". The New York Times. Retrieved 11 March 2012.
• From Newsweek: Martin, Douglas (2007-02-06). "Ralph de Toledano, 90, Writer Known as a Nixon Friend, Dies". New York Times. Retrieved 2013-05-28.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:19, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

One of the main sources for this article is a pro-Bales opinion piece with a clear agenda

I'm new to editing Wikipedia so probably shouldn't be the one to fix this article, but I couldn't help noticing some major problems with it. The article relies heavily on source 2 (https://www.military.com/daily-news/opinions/2021/01/04/president-trump-must-act-behalf-of-robert-bales-and-other-convicted-warfighters.html) and does a poor job of distinguishing between opinion and fact in that article. I have no problem with this opinion piece existing to advocate for Bales, and I am no expert on the case, but reading it makes it obvious that it isn't balanced or unbiased enough to form the backbone of a Wikipedia article.

Clearly someone who likes Bales edited this article at some point with the goal of making him look better. I think either everything from source 2 should be removed or changed to make clear that it is an opinion piece. It calls him a "warfighter" for crying out loud.

Misc

I agree with this note, and have made significant changes to this article to reflect the issue. I removed the totally unsourced material and condensed the lengthy passages based exclusively on this source. If others take issue with these edits, please send me a message here or on my Talk page so we can find consensus. Sammytwiki (talk) 08:16, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Reducing potentially hefty prison sentences; Ted Bundy

"After being arrested, Bales sought out attorney John Henry Browne, well known in Washington state for reducing his clients' potentially hefty prison sentences and representing Ted Bundy in court".--Vanity mention? Please remove hefty speculation and vanity mention. 46.15.97.214 (talk) 18:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Career

The paragraph that starts with "Bales was promoted..." contains a significant amount of speculation. It seems that an template also fell out. I edited it a little but perhaps parts should be taken out. 195.169.52.5 (talk) 08:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)