Deletion of Timothy Shepherd

Comment: The subject is clearly notable from our guidelines. However, since he is only "accused" I think this could be a  issue
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: Look, this article has several major problems.  The first is that it is covering the person instead of covering the case, as we should be doing.  This could be solved by renaming the page, but I don't think that's the solution here since the article makes no claim as to why this case is any different than dozens of murder investigations each year.  I'm confused why arguments stating that the article is well-sourced are used as justification for keeping this.  Simply being well-sourced is not good enough as #NEWS and  both speak to.  How does this fulfill either WP:Not#News or BIO1E?  How can we say that this case has lasting notability?  What is the evidence of this?  Is this specific case making an impact on the American legal system?  Is this specific case leading to a change in American society?  Although it is an interesting, yet gruesome, story, it does not warrant encyclopedic coverage according to our guidelines and policies
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:BIO1E)

Comment: Well-sourced, to secondary sources that satisfy  and , and not just local sources, but ''MSNBC'' and ''The Associated Press'', among others that haven't yet been included in the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:RS)