Talk:Murder of Graeme Thorne

message: It was believed by Police that Bradley did not act alone. They believe that they know the identity of his accomplice but never had the evidence to prove it.
I'm surprised to hear this -- it's never come up in any history of the case that I've read.  What source of information do you have? - Russell Brown 11:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does anyone know why Bradley did not receive the death penalty? Apparently it was pre-meditated murder.
Edward Carson (talk) 01:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He was not committed of murder, was he?  Anyway, kidnapping was not a capital offence at the time.  Socrates2008 (talk) 09:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bradley was convicted of murder, but NSW had abolished the death penalty in 1955. WWGB (talk) 00:24, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence for murder 

message: This article has sentences which are very similar to ones in the Crime Library article. This should be fixed. Also, more inline citations would be good. I've tagged the article as such. Paris1127 (talk) 04:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Copyright Infringement/Citations 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/classics/thorne/6.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Theleftorium (talk) 20:22, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: I changed references of "Thorne" to "Graeme Thorne", where the noun referenced the murdered boy. I found that solely using the surname in a story where the whole family is involved was confusing. Feel free to undo if I'm wrong to do so. Cbihun (talk) 12:56, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper Surname Use 

message: So, the kidnapper claimed that that the child died of suffocation in the car, and was not murdered by someone whose intent was to force the child to die. Why would that be relevant? Even if the death were not premeditated, it would still be murder because (a) it was the result of a felony in commission and (b) it was depraved indifference during a felony. That would be the law in New York State, so, I can't imagine arguing this technicality in Court. How is Australian law different?2600:1700:6759:B000:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 21:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Please clarify Australian law