Talk:Michael Newrzella

Untitled

16-year old police officer? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.76.247.55 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Apparently a typo, I changed it to his year of birth from de:Michael Newrzella. Kusma (討論) 19:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Terrorist?

I removed the references to Wolfgang Grams as a terrorist. There are several reasons. Firstly, we only use the word terrorist sparingly on wikipedia, it's a word to avoid. Secondly, no cite was provided for the claim he was a terrorist either here or in the Wolfgang Grams article. Thirdly, the WG article doesn't call him a terrorist. However the main reason why I removed it is because there is no evidence provided that he even did anything which would make him a terrorist. Neither here, nor the WG article nor the RAF article. From the WG article, the worst thing he appears to have done is to murder a police officer trying to arrest him. While this is a very serious crime, it doesn't fit most definitions of terrorism. He was associated with the RAF group but being associated with a group widely considered a terrorist group doesn't automatically make you a terrorist IMHO (and this is supported by most precendents on wikipedia). If he had aided any activities considered acts of terrorism then perhaps. But there is no evidence provided for his crimes on wikipedia other then the murder and the fact he was associated with the RAF. Nil Einne 15:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Wolfgang Grams death

I removed the claims that WG death remains a mystery. The WG article provides a quote (sadly not sourced) of an eyewitness account. It also claims that officially it has been concluded he did not commited suicide (sadly this isn't directly sourced either). It appears that there was a coverup since people resigned. The RAF article also mentioned the fact that there was a coverup and the resignations (none of this is cited either). [I updated the RAF article to include the claim it was officially concluded Grams did not commit suicide.] There are several Germans sources on the WG article which may provide some help. But sadly, as it stands now nothing is directly sourced. However given the evidence, it seems to suggest that there was a coverup and he didn't commit suicide is most likely correct Nil Einne 15:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

who shot Newrzella?

Just a note. It is inapropriate to claim Grams shot Newrzella (even going as far as saying he murdered him). There is serious doubt concerning the weapon used to shoot the GSG9 member, namely the fatal wound is supposed to have been delivered by a 9mm police weapon (Grams had a different weapon). This is just from memory, which is why I won't modify the Grams and Newrzella articles (at this point). Another note, the resignation of officials was largely over the killing of Newrzella and not over that of Grams, that is to say that there were serious issues concerning how the GSG9 (and other police, iirc local police were also involved) were sent in.--Caranorn 13:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh ok then Grams was the good guy and the Police shot one of their own. Good argument you bring in here. LOL

1) Sign your posts.

2) I never said anything as simplistic as Grams was the good guy and the Police shot one of their own. It had indeed been an RAF doctrine for some time to start shooting at Police during arrests, though the basis for that doctrine was the violent death of several early members of the RAF. So essentially both sides by the time of the Grams shooting were prepared for violence. Concerning who shot Newrzella this event was well documented at the time as I explained before. a) Part of the Police force, including the GSG9 went into action insufficiently prepared (not everyone was equipped with bullet proof vests (Newrzella had one it seems), lack of coordination between groups etc. b) Newrzella was shot by a type of ammunition compatible with Police weapons, not with Grams' gun. So it is highly probable that Newrzella was indeed shot by another Police officer. The problem is finding a source today when the subject is no longer of particular interest. Which is also the reason why I, unlike you, did not alter the article to push an undocumented POV.--Caranorn 14:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)