Talk:Jay C. Smith

NPOV violations and original research

A reminder: The opinions of reliable sources are worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. The opinions of editors are not. This article is filled with the latter. Some examples, with the offenses marked in bold:

Smith's exoneration should have undermined Bradfield's conspiracy conviction ...

Evidence that the authorities were duped by Bradfield (even if we do get opinions we can use from reliable sources that Bradfield deceived the authorities, this is so non-neutral it cannot be used as a section title!)

Despite his excellent alibi, evidence suggests that Bradfield orchestrated Reinert's murder and tried to frame Smith for it. ... (suggests to whom?)

Bradfield had warned associates that the evil Dr. Smith planned to kill Reinert for some time before the murder. ... (if this is a quote from Bradfield, it must be established as such and put in context.)

Smith was due to be sentenced and imprisoned the same day and in the same city that Reinert's body was found, so it seemed that Bradfield used his last opportunity to kill Reinert and throw suspicion on Smith. ... (seemed to whom?)

It seems doubtful that Smith, who had no motive for killing Reinert, would ... (seems doubtful to whom?)

Again, if these arguments have been made by reliable sources, we must identify those sources. Our own private interpretations are not of interest. -- 209.6.177.176 (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Including Smith on a list of exonerated is crazy.

Yes, the State Supreme Court overt-turned his opinion because of what they determined was misconduct relating to a particular piece of evidence (lifters off his shoes) which allegedly placed him at the crime scene.

Smith late sued the Pennsylvania State Police and others and LOST when the US 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals wrote "nothing in our review of the case. "Our confidence in Smith's convictions for the murder of Susan Reinert and her two children is not the least bit diminished by consideration of the suppressed lifters and quartz particles, and Smith has therefore not established that he is entitled to compensation for the unethical conduct of some of those involved in the prosecution.'

Smith, 210 F.3d 186 2603:9001:4200:E2D1:55B8:7337:4650:926 (talk) 22:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Reinert murders

Wikipedia does not have an article about the "Reinert murders" and Susan Reinert redirects to this article. How can Wikipedia have a biographical article about a person who is primarily notable for having his conviction for murder overturned, when it does not have an article about the murders themselves?, I also have issues with the article including so much detail of the murder case in this biographical article, without mentioning other details about Smith's criminal issues in similar details. This article originally started life under the title Smith and Bradfield but both the victim, Susan Reinert, as well as William Bradfield's part in her murder have been progressively written out of this article, with undue weight being placed on Smith's role, alone. With such a large section devoted to Smith's role in the murder(s), the result is almost a pseudo-biography. The murder of Susan Reinert and her children appear to also be known in the media as the "Main Line murders" and it appears there is going to be a Netflix documentary about them.[1] So, I suspect the murders are actually notable and Wikipedia should have an article about them; possibly it is this one. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 21:53, 5 January 2025 (UTC)