Talk:Xavier Romeu

message: Mr. Romeu was never a "fugitive".  The Justice Department, knowing how to reach him as well as his attorneys, Frankie Rebollo and Jose Andreu-Fuentes, did not advise him that charges were to be filed so that he could be present at the time of filing, which is SOP in white collar crime indictments in Puerto Rico.  They took the unusual step of indicting him in absentia.  Whether DOJ knew that the date they had chosen to indict him was during his honeymoon remains to be determined.  It was reported that Mr. Romeu has cut short his honeymoon trip abroad to appear in court on Monday, three business days after he found out while abroad that he had been indicted in absentia.  He's not in hiding nor is he on the lam and can hardly be called a "fugitive" after knowing these facts without showing a bias against a presumedly innocent citizen.Pr4ever 14:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fugitive?

message: As the author of the original stub/article of Mr. Romeu back in July, I would ask the several Wikipedia fans who have been trying to use this article as a forum for their political/personal fights or to try to prosecute/defend in this forum the charges filed against him, to refrain from doing so.
I would particularly invite forum participants to refrain from deleting relevant facts that are sourced or a matter of public record.  
For example, it is a well-known fact that during the operation of the so-called "Blue Riboon Committee" several witnesses or targets requested to record the proceedings.  Committee members and staff refused to allow that.  In Puerto Rico, the content of all non-penal hearings, such as legislative investigations, Puerto Rico Civil Rights Commission, etc., hearings are preserved in an audio or video recording.  All penal hearings are either recorded by the courts administration or defendants, in the case of "Rule 6/probable cause" hearings are allowed to record proceedings.  This fact should not have been redacted by one of the forum participants hostile to Mr. Romeu.
A second example is the redaction of the reference that Mr. Romeu's charges were filed in absentia.  Several months back, a great public debate on several instances of unnecessary filings in absentia led Attorney General Sánchez Ramos to reinstitute the rule that prosecutors will no longer file in absentia unless reasonable attempts to contact the accused or their attorney had not resulted in their voluntary appearance,  obviously excepting cases of violence and other dangerous crimes where the accussed could flee.  Mr. Romeu's charges were filed in absentia, in spite of the fact that his legal counsel had been in contact with the Justice Department, that there were no extraordinary circumstances requiring immediate action, and that Mr. Romeu was in the middle of his honeymoon.  These relevant facts were improperly redacted from the article.
Among the consequences of the in absentia filing are: (1) that the judge is not exposed to exculpatory evidence that may lead to a refusal to charge the accused of wrongdoing, and (2) that the accused is denied the opportunity to record a proceeding that the courts don't preserve on tape, thus being denied knowledge of what was said and what purported evidence was presented to the judge.
I would strongly suggest that the partisans who have developed a "shooting war" for political or personal reasons in this article (a look at the fact that most of their Wikipedia contributions are Romeu-related attests to the fact that they are partisans and that their virtually sole motive to participate is to defend or attack Mr. Romeu) vent their love or anger, sourced or not, on this discussion page, and then allow more objective editors to actually edit the article.
Otherwise, measures may be taken to freeze the article during an appropriate "cooling period", perhaps until Mr. Romeu's charges are dismissed or otherwise dealt with by the Puerto Rico courts. Pr4ever 12:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing fight 

message: The neutrality and accuracy of this article are disputed.  There appears to be an edit war between to vastly different sets of information.  Looking for help from someone who can research the subject. - Djgranados 05:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality and Accuracy