Talk:Dale Cregan

Need for article

This is a WP:BLP1E and probably did not need to be spun off from Murder of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone. It would be better to have a "Perpetrator" section in that article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:49, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I completely agree. I also don't think it's helpful describing Cregan as a serial killer, as he doesn't seem to fit the remit. Paul MacDermott (talk) 18:58, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

If his only murders were of the two policewomen, he would not need an article of his own. He committed four murders and three attempted murders. Hence he is notable enough for his own article and BLP1E does not apply. His murders were in three separate incidents, in May, August and September last year, hence he is a serial killer. In what way are you saying he does not fit the definition of a serial killer? The length of time between the first murder and second murder, as well as between the second murder and the double murder, means that he is a serial killer, not a spree killer. Jim Michael (talk) 23:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Cregan does not need a separate article at the moment, any more than Mark Bridger does for the Murder of April Jones. Unless there is going to be something approaching a full length biography (rather than a rerun of news coverage from a court case) WP:BLP1E applies. The term "serial killer" is not the best way to describe this case.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)}

While he meets the required number of killings, serial killer isn't an appropriate term here. It's perhaps more accurate to say he's a career criminal who was convicted of several murders. There is scope for a full length biography, I suspect. I read a very good article on the BBC website yesterday that goes into the background of the events that led to the shootings, but at present all this does is repeat what's in the main article. It needs to be a lot longer if we're going to justify keeping it. Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

ok, I've changed the lede to reflect my comments above. Don't revert it back without first discussing any changes you want to make here. Thanks Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:36, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Bridger does not need his own article because he is not known or suspected of killing anyone other than Jones. There is only one major crime that he has been convicted of; all his other convictions are for low-level offences. Cregan is a successful drug dealer who has been convicted of four murders and three attempts. The article should be substantially longer than it currently is, which can easily be achieved because of the large amount of media coverage of him and his crimes. No-one has said which part of the serial killer criteria he does not fulfil. That he was a career criminal for years prior to becoming a murderer does not mean that he is not a serial killer. Marc Dutroux was a successful career criminal for years before he became a murderer - no-one questions whether or not Dutroux is a serial killer. Cregan is in some ways typical for a serial killer: he appears to have the malevolent subtype of ASPD and the motives for his murders include sadism, revenge, power/control/dominance as well as causing fear. Jim Michael (talk) 12:57, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware the media haven't labelled him as a serial killer (certainly the BBC didn't yesterday), and the media is what we need to take our lead from here. If they decide to call him a serial killer then there's no problem with us doing that too. I think with the case you mention from Belgium the press were using that description. But returning to Cregan, although you're probably right about aspects of his character fitting the mould, unless it can be referenced from somewhere it sounds too much like original research. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see the Daily Mail are using it. Not sure that really means we should. If The Times, The Guardian, The Independent, BBC, etc, use the same language then we can give it more thought. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:53, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Loss of eye

All of the claims for how Cregan lost his left eye are anecdotal. The Daily Mail is not a reliable source on this issue.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:59, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

In general, I agree. So why did you restore the stories about a Thai gangster and a Thai police officer, neither of which were in the Daily Mail or any other cited source? – Smyth\^talk 22:56, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

It was accidentally re-added while fixing the cite in this edit. Sorry about that. FWIW, no-one in Manchester seems to know how he lost the eye, which adds weight to the theory that it happened on one of his overseas trips. If it had happened in a bar fight in Manchester and he went to a NHS hospital, there would be a record of what happened. Also, the article is excessively relying on the Daily Mail cite at [1], which confirms that the article still has WP:BLP1E issues.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 04:59, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Not clear

It is still not clear why he gave himself up voluntarily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.124.102 (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

On 12 June 2012, Cregan came back to the UK from Thailand and was arrested at Manchester Airport in connection with the murder of Mark Short. He was then bailed until 14 August, which has led to controversy, as Mark Short's father David was killed by Cregan on 10 August.[2] Following these murders, Cregan realised that he could not stay on the run, and seems to have carried out the Murder of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone as a final act of defiance. He went to the police station an hour later, and made no attempt to hide what he had done.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Serial killer or not?

Since the term has crept back into the article I'm going to raise this issue again. I know the Daily Mail have decided to use it, but describing Cregan as a serial killer is not an accurate use of the term. I imaging there are more than a few people in the criminal underworld who are responsible for three or more deaths, and it's an entirely different set of circumstances. People such as Sam DeStefano are certainly not regarded as serial killers. Sociopath or psychopath are probably closer to the mark, but I'm not going to remove the statement again as I've already done so two or three times, and don't wish to become embroiled in an edit war. We do need some consensus on this issue though. So, it's over to you. Paul MacDermott (talk) 20:03, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree, it's a misuse of the term. I've restored 'drug dealer and convicted murderer'. Rothorpe (talk) 23:11, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

There are some good profiles of Cregan in the Manchester Evening News and The Independent. It would be better to use these rather than rehashing a Daily Mail article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 04:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Cregan "moved back to prison"

Re this edit. This comes from a Daily Mirror story which is less than ideal because it cites unnamed sources and does not directly support the claim that he has been moved back to prison in February 2014. The reason given for the move was not that he wanted to smoke, but because he "no longer needs specialist care".--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:41, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

August 2015 photographs

Cregan is on the front page of The Sun today. The reason is that family members took photographs with him and published them on Instagram.[3] Not sure if this is really notable enough for the article, but the MEN story has some useful information about where Cregan is currently held. The photos were taken at Ashworth hospital, but Cregan is said to have since been moved back to prison.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:52, 8 August 2015 (UTC)