Talk:Christian Gerhartsreiter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

What did he do before "marrying" Boss

Why is this different

there are thousands of kidnappings every day. why is this one so different? should there be a wikipedia page of every kidnapping? maybe so... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.207.25.199 (talk) 23:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't been following this story, or you wouldn't ask such a question. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The abduction itself is nothing out of the ordinary, it's the mystery surrounding the alleged abductor that's article-worthy. The only thing that makes the crime itself unique is the fact that it served to trip-up a 30-year (alleged) serial impostor. Thanks, Master Scott | Talk 21:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

This article states little or no references and presents information of a highly speculative nature. As such I have tagged the article. As key points, no evidence has yet been presented that he is anything but Clark Rockefeller, any statements otherwise are pure guesswork and are not in accordance with Wikipedia's NPOV policy (Let alone innocent until proven guilty!). The only basis which is acceptable is to state that he is not related to 'the Rockefellers'. In the long term, due to the name he is most widely known by, I would suggest that the article remains as 'Clark Rockefeller' and that any final proven true identity redirects here, along with an opening statement of the like 'Clark Rockefeller was an alias of [Insert Random Name here], a man who kidnapped.... blah blah'.

It would be great if someone could 'neutralise' the article, best wishes Tachyon502 (talk) 19:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given the lack of absolute proof, and the issue of neutrality (specifically regarding his name), I'll record my comment here: The suspicion that Mr. "Rockefeller" is an appropriator of socially-prominent names is heightened by the name of his daughter: Reigh Storrow Mills Boss. Storrow is a prominent Boston surname, and I am unaware of a connection between that family and either Mr. "Rockefeller" or his wife, Sandra Boss. I'm in a position to have knowledge of this, though it cannot be said to be an encyclopedic knowledge. (User:Edward_Ellerslie, 29 Dec, 2008) —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC).[reply]

"No evidence"? Surely you jest

Although in agreement with Tachyon502's conclusion (and some of the underlying reasoning) that this article can reasonably remain titled 'Clark Rockefeller' for now, and perhaps a long time, I disagree with the declaration that no evidence has been 'presented' that he is not Clark Rockefeller, and I believe that the article should include mention of the various pieces of fingerprint evidence that have been reported by respectable news media.

Right now you can Google "gerhartsreiter rockefeller fingerprint" and get more than a thousand hits, so it is difficult to believe that someone who has closely followed this story is unaware of the mention of fingerprint evidence. The FBI is reported as having stated that fingerprints taken from the putative Rockefeller match the INS (United States Immigration and Naturalization Service) thumbprint of Christian Gerhartsreiter, which he was apparently required to submit in order to get a green card in the early 1980s. The 'Rockefeller' prints have also been reported as matching prints submitted by the putative 'Chris Chichester' when he applied for a license to work in the U.S. securities trade, later in the 1980s.

The subject, through his attorney, has admitted having used the name Chichester while living in the Los Angeles area in the mid 1980s; he asserts this was intended to afford him a better chance at acceptance in a career in dramatic arts there. But, 'Rockefeller' has not asserted any reason why 'Chichester' would be a better name to use in a Hollywood career than 'Rockefeller'. --Odd that Paris Hilton has never realized ho much more successful she would be, if she posed as someone named Chichester, don't you think? Perhaps more tellingly, if you care to pretend that he has any credibility at all, he has not asserted any reason that he might have supposed 'Chris Chichester Crowe' would be a better name to use in the securities trade, than 'Rockefeller' --the only family name in America that could be considered pre-eminent as a marker for family wealth! Publius3 (talk) 21:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha ha, maybe my wording of no evidence was not completely true! I had heard about the fingerprints, but his lawyer is also asserting that as far as he is concerned there was no evidence which suggested he was anything but Clark Rockefeller. I think we have to be careful about media hype in these cases. So please don't get me wrong, I deeply suspect the guy is not called Rockefeller at all, but for the time being we really shouldn't be presenting that as factual info. And very funny on the Paris Hilton comment by the way!! Tachyon502 (talk) 21:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
His lawyer is not being paid to try to get his client convicted. Meanwhile, the article seems to cover the relevant facts sufficiently. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Future redirect?

Assuming that Clark Rockefeller is in fact confirmed to actually be Christian Karl Gehrhartsreiter, at what point should this article be turned into a redirect and its content copy/pasted into a new article under his actual name? Does anyone know of a precedent for this action? Thanks, Master Scott | Talk 23:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We redirect once he either confirms his identity, they confirm his identity, or they do a DNA test. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but I think it should be when either he confirms, or a court confirms (i.e. a trial) - in which case I think that the move and redirect is premature. I believe it's him, but I think it's too soon. Thanks, Master Scott | Talk 23:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
and..."The district attorney's office and FBI in Boston said Monday they were not ready to declare Rockefeller and Gerhartsreiter were the same person."[1]Thanks, Master Scott | Talk 13:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Boston Herald reports that his various aliases are confirmed. [1] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I agree that they have gotten it right...but, until he admits it, or a court upholds this conclusion, it does not really matter what anyone else 'declares' - especially the media. They have also declared that he is a kidnapper, but he has the benefit of the doubt until a judge or jury says otherwise. Even a DNA match does not count until a judge rules on it. So, declaration or not, IMO this article has been moved prematurely. Anyone else on this one? Thanks, Master Scott | Talk 01:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changing your identity, by itself, is not a criminal act, so I don't see any harm leaving it where it is, although he's probably better known as "Clark Rockefeller", since most of us don't speak German and would have to think about how to spell his birth name. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hGbAirbzAI5iGCtDGLR58A4-gYQwD92GM9B82

Sources

Can someone identify what paper this 1994 clipping [[2]] came from, so it can be used as a reference? Some at the Boston Herald comment blog link 350784, [3]provided a link to the scanned clipping. The second page says "SGVN" but I do not find a paper called "San Gabriel Valley News." Other possibilities? Edison (talk) 22:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SGVN leads to this [4] which includes the San Gabriel Valley Tribune. I haven't found a history of the Tribune offhand. The clipping looks to be for real, though. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another newspaper in the San Gabriel Valley Newsgroup talks about this old case: [5] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And yet another within the SGVN umbrella: [6] In fact that writeup has a link to that same PDF clipping, so there's no question it's for real. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kidnapping, not abduction, has been alleged

An anonymous user edited the lede, replacing a kidnapping charge with an abduction charge. I have undone this edit, because the charge is in fact a kidnapping charge: in the August 16 blog entry at http://massachusettsfamilylaw.blogspot.com, Massachusetts law, Chapter M.G.L. 265, Section 26A ("Kidnapping of minor or incompetent by relative") is quoted and it is stated that this is the law under which he has been charged. Unless someone shows that this is not the law under which he has been charged, "kidnapping" should stay in the lede.

Brother Alex Gerhartsreiter lives in Bergen

User Kunderbunt edited the article, deleting mention that A.G. lives in Bergen, saying that he does not live there. But, provided no reference in support of this belief. By contrast, numerous articles have stated that A.G. lives in Bergen. Reporters from both the Boston Herald and the Boston Globe interviewed him at his ancestral home in Bergen and reported that he lived there with his mother. I've provided one reference, other sources not cited here are in agreement. Have reworded a sentence or two, in the process of reinstituting mention of Bergen in this respect. Publius3 (talk) 06:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Identity is determined/ascertained by law enforcement, NOT a court

If you give a false name or ID to the cops, the cops do not have to go to court and make a federal case out of it. They're the ones to determine your true identity based on fingerprints or DNA or whatever. Same in forensic cases. The courts are not involved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwayne5r (talk • contribs) 22:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the United States, it is legal to use an assumed name, as long as it is not for the purposes of fraud. No name registration, or legal change of name, is required. When questioned by police, it is legal to give them an assumed name, and even a picture ID with that name on it. If the ID is counterfeit, then fraud has occurred. Similarly, if the police ask a suspect if he or she has any other names under which they are known, and the suspect says there are none, or knowingly gives an incomplete list of aliases while claiming that it is complete, then an offense has occurred. If, however, the suspect remains silent, or pleads the fifth amendment's protection, then the police and courts may infer that another identity exists, and pursue leads. A suspect may be held while their identity is verified, and such leads are pursued. There is much evidence to suggest that this individual, identified as Clark Rockefeller, has perpetrated fraud, but he is entitled to a trial to make this and other determinations. As he identifies himself as Clark Rockefeller, it is most appropriate to title this article in that fashion, even if a separate article on Christien Gerhartsreiter exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.55.175 (talk) 19:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This may be a stupid question, but how can it be legal to give the police a picture ID with an assumed name but "if the ID is counterfeit then fraud has occurred"? Sounds paradoxical to me.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 21:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a stupid question and not paradoxical. For example, my father's birth certificate lists him as "Joseph" (a fact I discovered when asking him for one for a security clearance) but he, and other members of my family apparently, have always been known by other names as their names are recycled in the family tree. As such, ALL of his ID identify him by his common name of "Robert." He was registered as such in school and continued to use this identity throughout his whole life without a legal name change. At the age of 55, he is allowed to do so as this is the identity he is and always has used to idenitfied himself. Identity is largely about how you are known and if you can prove this is how you are known, you can often obtain identification to back it up... provided that you are not attempting fraud or (related) using this identity as a means of escape. I myself have changed my name through a similar process (of course, mine was easy as the name I asked for was a variant of my birth name AND I repeatedly in documentation- security clearances, censes, etc. - acknowledged that I was once known by another name) and married people often do them same, having ID in both maiden and married names without legally changing their name to a married name (I live in a jurisdiction where it is not automatic and you are expected to file a Change of Legal Name petition with "marriage" under the reason field). However, you always need to be able to back up your claims of being known as this identity and explain the reasons for changes, if asked by authorities (we never have). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.123.238 (talk) 01:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portions of this text are plagiarized

Compare http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2008/08/german_man_iden.html?p1=Well_MostPop_Emailed5 to the material under "Christopher Crowe". The text is identical to parts of the article. Jonquilserpyllum (talk) 19:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage in Vanity Fair

Some coverage in Vanity Fair can be found here. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 17:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is Christian Gerhartsreiter considered an illegal immigrant to the U.S.?

Question from a German: Is Christian Gerhartsreiter an illegal immigrant to the U.S.? And if so, is he facing his deportation to Germany? --84.44.230.80 (talk) 11:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, he's not. I was at the trial today and the representative from Immigration testified that he is legally here in the United States. 66.31.162.89 (talk) 23:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last section

The section titled "Claims compiled by Boston Globe & acquaintances" is not well presented: it's a listing of various claims, many of which are utterly trivial in nature. The list is curt and gives no context at all.

Presentation issues aside, I think this section should be removed from the article. It's interesting as a newspaper article, but it doesn't seem appropriate for an encyclopedia. Why on earth are we reporting that someone says Gerhartsreiter claims he's never eaten cheese? Does it get much more trivial than that?

I suggest the section be removed. Phiwum (talk) 13:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trial

I am partially listening to the trial right now, but I noticed that there is no coverage of it on the page, and I was also wondering if anyone would be willing to take notes on what he told Sandra because he told some pretty amazing stories. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarized text removed

I have removed the "Possible multiple identities" section, which constituted the majority of the article, due to the plagiarism pointed out by User:Jonquilserpyllum above. Almost this entire section appears to have been plagiarized from Boston.com by User:Master Scott Hall on August 8-9, 2008. --JHP (talk) 00:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming and enhancing article

This article really should be renamed to reflect the guy's legal name. His legal name is not Rockefeller and he's called himself multiple things over the years. It should also include some information about testimony at the trial, including the diagnosis of narcissitic personality disorder by the two shrinks who testified. It's been covered by multiple press agencies. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 01:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In accordance with Wikipedia's most easily recognized name rule and common name rule, the article name should remain "Clark Rockefeller". --JHP (talk) 05:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You guys might want to mention the similarity of this person's alleged confidence scam by use of the surname Rockefeller, and that of Christophe Rocancourt (a.k.a. Christopher Rockefeller). I, for one, thought it was the same guy at first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.224.237 (talk) 02:54, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Re)verification of previous Wikipedia statements on this subject

It was initially reported in Wikipedia that the skeletal remains found on the Sohus property in California were eventually cremated by local authorities, presumably (although not stated) because they were unclaimed. The current article now reports those skeletal remains are extant and are the basis for forensic testing and possible murder charges against Clark Rockefeller/ Christian Gerhartsreiter. This is a significant discrepancy and should be addressed in the text, rather than left for the reader to accept as a de facto state of reportge. Prime-daedalus (talk) 03:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prime-daedalus (talk • contribs) 06:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sandra Boss

Why does it say at the beginning that she was a lawyer? Even later in the body it says she went to Stanford University (I assume for her undergrad degree) and then to Harvard for an MBA. Nowhere does it say she even went to law school, let alone became a lawyer. Certainly, she didn't practice as a lawyer. She was an executive.

Also, why does it say they separated? They divorced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbb23 (talk • contribs) 04:26, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to most accounts I've read they were never legally married, even though she didn't know that. They separated. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But the article is inconsistent as it uses the word "divorce" multiple times. And it's not clear whether there was a divorce decree, even if there was no marriage. It's kind of a mish-mash. Bbb23 (talk) 18:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No one else chimed in, so I changed the opening paragraph to remove the reference to Boss as a lawyer and to make the paragraph clearer. Bbb23 (talk) 23:38, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Sohus

This is personal knowledge rather than encyclopedic but I want to mention that Linda had been known by other names, all of them legitimate name changes. When she came into sf fandom she published some zines for the apa LASFAPA under the name Linda Terashita -- it's my belief that this was the surname of her first husband; she once mentioned that she left him for beating her. I knew her personally as Linda Mayfield, which I believe was her maiden name, she took the last name Sohus upon marrying John Sohus. She signed some of unicorn artwork under the pseudonym 'Cody' but never made any attempt to hide that it was her, it was, she said, smaller and detracted less from the art.

She was my good friend, and despite what Dateline and the defense attorneys imply, was seemingly incapable of the violence shown here. She was probably killed separately from John Sohus in another location and her body will never be found.

I've lost relatives, I've lost my mother and father, I've lost intimate friends. Linda is the first friend I ever had who was lost to murder. Legally Christian Gerhartsreiter is innocent until proven guilty. Metaphysically, it's a certainty he killed my friend. -- Davidkevin (talk) 08:57, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I heard that she had (before I met her in 1982) used a boyfriend's name Terashita; never heard that she was married before John. —Tamfang (talk) 03:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading

The word "killings" in the box on the right gives the impression that R.S.M.Boss is dead. This seems to be untrue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.123.215.180 (talk) 11:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Christian Gerhartsreiter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:45, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Christian Gerhartsreiter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Christian Gerhartsreiter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection

Have temporarily protected the article to pause the current edit war, and give time to resolve a matter raised with arbcom via email. Apologies for any inconvenience. -- Euryalus (talk) 08:41, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Locked article edit request

Edit request: For the citation <ref name="‘Sam’ Clark Rockefeller will likely get the boot from U.S."> please remove the {{dead link}} it is redundant with {{webarchive}}. -- GreenC 19:00, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Christian Gerhartsreiter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trial videos available?

Are the videos of his trial available somewhere online? Chaptagai (talk) 16:44, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Christian_Gerhartsreiter&oldid=1207393465"