Talk:Dean Corll

message: __TOC__
To the unsigned editor re: rape and many other matters such as torture, there's no proof, it's an assumption. How do you know what Corll did vs. any of the other parties?  Crimescrutineer (talk) 18:58, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

message: Dean Corll was a gay man and this was well known and factual information about him.  I read it in a true crime book about him titled "The man with the candy". Why is this not mentioned in the article?71.185.163.185 (talk) 05:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: * It is mentioned in the 'U.S. Army Service' section. Aside from this fact, the content of the article would also make his sexual preferences blatantly clear.--Kieronoldham (talk) 15:35, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: OK I just was wondering why he's not in the category of LGBT people, or whatever it's called now on here?71.185.163.211 (talk) 00:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homosexual 

message: I don't see this as having been discussed. But, apparently Rhonda Williams was present when the polaroid of the suspected victim was found in Elmer Wayne Henley's possesions. She claims it to be a hoax, 100% photo-shopped. Possibly a faked photo created to promote the upcoming film being made about The Houston Mass-Murders. Should this be brought up in the discussion of possible victims? Or has the picture been authenticated beyond Rhonda's suspicions? Here's a link to the article I read about this situation: http://fatcatwebproductions.com/HoustonExtremeNews/node/39
Nickeldorf (talk) 06:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The image has been used in several new articles as I'm sure you are already aware. None of them have mentioned it being dubious as far as I am aware. I also read the image released by Vargas was a 'photo-shopped' version of the original he had found, but I'll have to check on that claim. 
To cut a long story short I believe Rhonda and the film's producer were friends but fell out after her stating the image you mention was not disclosed to police by Vargas at the initial point of finding. I don't know if she was with Vargas et al when the photo was apparently discovered, but enough news organizations have broadcast the discovery and I assume it has been authenticated via enough personnel prior to this to warrant it at least being seemingly genuine.--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:00, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

text: Fair enough. I happened to come across that particular article after doing some research on Rhonda Williams and her book. She made a few claims on various Dean Corll websites that she believes that photo was a fake. If I come across any other information that might bring this photo into question I'll discuss it here before adding anything to the article. Just thought it might be an interesting footnote. Nickeldorf (talk) 02:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo of possible victim a hoax? 

message: I updated this page with corrected information on Henley's sentence from 6 life sentences consecutively to 6 life sentences concurrently and my edit was reverted. Can you explain why?   
FYI- The reason Henley is eligible for parole is in part due to the fact that the sentences are concurrent and viewed as 1 life sentence by the state of Texas. At the time of his conviction- a life sentence was considered 20 years.
Thanks
Txcrimenews (talk) 06:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't change that fact - you did so yourself in apparent error yesterday. As for your research in discovering the 1973 mis-identification, I kept that information in the article - some wording had slight grammar errors ('claim to the Gibson'). I also tried to ensure the text conformed with how the Wiki. article was written. --Kieronoldham (talk) 06:19, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Henley Sentence 

message: In § 1.1 reference is made to "Pasadena". In addition to Texas, there is a Pasadena in California. 
In § 1.3, "Corll was drafted into the United States Army on August 10, 1964,[2][15] ". I don't believe a draft existed in 1964.
LarryVanV (talk) 21:32, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarity and factual issues 

message: This article contains a photo of a young boy being, or is about to be, tortured. The boy is obiusly terrified. To have this photo in this article is absurd at best. I will remove it. Miantonimah (talk) 07:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been reviewed and verified. Also, it can be found elsewhere on the internet.--Kieronoldham (talk) 23:59, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

text: I also found this quite uncomfortable, especially as the victim in the photograph was almost certainly tortured to death, and is also almost certainly a minor (it's probably not technically child pornography because there are no relevant body parts exposed, but arguably photographs of children tied down for sexual torture might still count as child porn).  The fact that it can be found elsewhere on the internet is irrelevant; there's lots of stuff elsewhere on the internet that's not on Wikipedia.  The Wikipedia articles about other serial killers include photographs of the victims, but not of them being tortured.  I've got a pretty strong stomach and read the entire article, but I'm deeply disturbed by the photo being here.  It feels exhibitionist and I'm not sure what it adds to the article other than the knowledge that it exists; perhaps the article could permalink to the image instead, but not display it? Lakmiseiru (talk) 21:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  (Per image talk page, slightly updated): I respect your opinion, but this is hardly 'snuff' (the subject isn't "being tortured"; he is fully clothed and likely but not certainly handcuffed). The image is, as can be seen and described in the rationale, the object of discussion within the article. This image has been thoroughly reviewed by respected editors and approved, and, as explained earlier, it can be found with ease on the Internet. Image is of an unidentified victim. Maybe he can be identified by showing image on here? No nudity or gore is depicted in image. If you your find the usage of this image somewhat distasteful, you could divert your attention to what could more likely classify as 'snuff' by acknowledging images aplenty on the Jack the Ripper or My Lai Massacre etc. Wikipedia pages which would more likely classify as 'snuff' images. I could add that images like that of The Falling Man, and Phan Thi Kim Phuc in 1972 could classify as 'exhibitionist', but are pertinent. Again, it's been verified. Regards.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:04, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, it is vitally important the photograph of the boy is kept in the public eye, as he has never been identified. It is also part of why he is still notorious to this day (Corll that is). 86.135.159.22 (talk) 20:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Torture photo 

message: I think it could be beneficial if we used the Harvard citations template or shortened footnote template for books/magazines that are used repeatedly throughout the article. So for The Man with the Candy: The Story of the Houston Mass Murders it would show as Olsen 1974, p. 25. under references and then link to the full citation under cited works. That book is referenced about 44 times, and it's the full citation, so instead of repeating the full citation over and over again, it might be beneficial to do it this way. I'm fine with how it is currently, but I think this could reduce the need to use the complete citation. I've tried the rp template to show page numbers next to a couple of refs, which could also be used, but I'm unsure.  do you have any thoughts? Melonkelon (talk) 23:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I am easy either way (although I too prefer the current parameters). I do believe that the current method divulges extent of research from numerous, independent sources to morph into the article as it stands without leaning too heavily on one or two sources alone to structure the article. I have always by default chosen to use references in the method I do. If Harvard is deemed better and/or additional citations are requested I'll help restructure them.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think  should be used for The Man with the Candy refs? That way it would be one named ref, with the page numbers provided by rp, but then the page numbers don't show in the references section. On one hand I think that having the full citation for 44 refs is too much, because it's basically repeating the same ref over and over with the only differences being the page numbers, but on the other hand, I think it's fine. Melonkelon (talk) 00:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps. Be my guest if you see fit. One of numerous refs condensed in this manner doesn't detract for all others displayed in their current manner showing clearly the volume of refs used to morph the article together. As you said: on the other hand, the current parameters are not detrimental in any way.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harvard citations 

message: I am wondering if Branch was murdered in February or November of 1972. The only source that sources November 1972 is the autopsy report, but it has a lot more detail about him being last seen hitchhiking. His headstone on findagrave.com says February 1972, as well as this 1993 article:
https://archive.vn/20120723181807/http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl/1993_1146085/the-horror-remains-20-years-later-memories-of-dean.html/
There appears to be no missing person report filed for him.
: The gravestone says February. This document (which you reference) states November. The 1993 article states he was strangled, rather than shot. I would say the date of November is more truthful, personally. He is known to have run away on a few occasions. If you can find an actual missing persons report?--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:38, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Willard Branch date of murder?

message: Some sources say that there are 27, others 28, others 29 known Corll's victims (identified or not). Could someone please check this.  - Daveout(talk) 00:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Twenty-seven were found in 1973. One of whom is strongly believed to be unrelated to the case (Sellars who was shot with a rifle and whom a member of the public led police to the grave of on Aug. 13). A further body (Lyles) was discovered in 1983 wrapped in the same plastic sheeting as most of the other victims. That leaves 27 definite found victims. Mark Scott's body was never recovered. He was a definite victim - named by both Henley and Brooks. That makes 28 known victims incl. 'Swimsuit Boy', found in the boat shed on Aug. 9.--Kieronoldham (talk) 10:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the explanation and for fixing the article.  - Daveout(talk) 11:09, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of victims needs checking

message: Don't we need to change Dean Corll's infobox photo? Call me if I'm wrong but I really don't think it's this photo you could call, I don't know, professional when anyone checks the most infamous serial killer with a whole bunch of informations added to his page. 
There's infamous serial killers Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Edmund Kemper, Charles Manson and a bunch of other criminals, murderers and serial killers with a better picture than the current Dean Corll's infobox photo. Perhaps I'm wrong since these criminals and serial killers' infobox photos are the mugshots, but you get what I mean, there's better photos to add than the almost unrecognizable photo of Dean Corll with a weirdly smile, holding a dog doll.
I'm basically asking to find a better photo than that, if not that's fine. Any thoughts guys? Akram GameYT (talk) 12:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: There are only around four known photographs of Corll in his thirties, and this one was taken, if memory serves me correct, at Easter 1973. Scant choice, frankly. Obviously no mugshots exist.--Kieronoldham (talk) 23:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dean Corll's infobox photo