PDA

View Full Version : Manhunt Blamed erroneously!


opus13
08-04-2004, 05:52 PM
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/04/manhunt_murder_claim/ (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/04/manhunt_murder_claim/)

By Tony Smith (http://forms.theregister.co.uk/mail_author/?story_url=/2004/08/04/manhunt_murder_claim/)
Published Wednesday 4th August 2004 16:44 GMT
The copy of the computer game Manhunt that was discovered during the investigation into the murder of a 14-year-old boy was not the possession of the killer but the victim, it has emerged.

UK retailers Dixons and Game both pulled the title from their stores' shelves last week (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/29/dixons_manhunt/) after the parents of the murdered boy, Stefan Pakeerah, alleged that his murderer, Warren LeBlanc, 17, was "obsessed" by the grisly game and that it had inspired has murderous actions.

The victims father dubbed Manhunt "a manual for murder". It was widely reported by the mainstream press, online and TV media that the game had been found in LeBlanc's bedroom.

However, today it emerged that Leicestershire police found the game in Pakeerah's room, not LeBlanc's, GamesIndustry.biz reports. (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=pub&aid=3918)

"The video game was not found in Warren LeBlanc's room, it was found in Stefan Pakeerah's room," a police spokesperson said today. "Leicestershire Constabulary stands by its response that police investigations did not uncover any connections to the video game, the motive for the incident was robbery."

Police believe LeBlanc murdered Pakeerah, whom he knew, to obtain money to pay back a drug-related debt.

LeBlanc's assumed possession of Manhunt raised the questions as to how a 17-year-old was able to get hold of the game. The game carries an 18 certificate, so it is illegal to sell it to anyone under that age. Now it has emerged that the game was owned by the 14-year-old Pakeerah, that question has not gone away.

Boone
08-04-2004, 07:38 PM
I still stand by my opinion that games sometimes go too far, but the mis-information by the Media in this matter is unacceptable. If this report is indeed fact, then they must be made to answer for it.

After all, they have lied to the public when they were not in posession of the facts.

I don't blame the police for it, because they had stated before-hand that the video game might not have been connected with the murder. I'm not sure the parents themselves knew about the game - maybe their unfortunate son had kept the game hidden from them? Perhaps they had also been given false information and had decided to investigate the game themselves... :shrug:

mattmos
08-04-2004, 08:18 PM
I really really hope that the makers sue Dixons...

Vushvush
08-04-2004, 09:23 PM
lol... manual for murder. Too bad there isn't a game that can be a "manual for self defense when your friend comes to rob and kill you."

You'd think the impresionable 14 year old would've learned from the game and subdued his assailant with the plastic bag from his trash. So much for video games influencing young people :(

Breinmeester
08-04-2004, 09:36 PM
Why do people keep letting the media cloud their thinking?

MikeRhone
08-04-2004, 11:02 PM
I think Rockstar and Take2 should sue the parents and laywer for libel and slander. Especially considering the murderer didn't even own the game until he murdered the dude to steal his stuff, including the copy of the game.

Gah! Stupidity!

Tom N.
08-04-2004, 11:12 PM
LeBlanc's assumed possession of Manhunt raised the questions as to how a 17-year-old was able to get hold of the game. The game carries an 18 certificate, so it is illegal to sell it to anyone under that age. Now it has emerged that the game was owned by the 14-year-old Pakeerah, that question has not gone away.

Seriously.. how on EARTH could he have GOTTEN it? :rolleyes:

-Tom N.

Anim8rJB
08-05-2004, 12:16 AM
Why do people keep letting the media cloud their thinking?
yeah seriously...what video games did Hitler and Saddam play when they were children? People always need a scapegoat, and video games are the flavor of the week.

Big_E.D.
08-05-2004, 02:23 AM
media sucks. plain and simple. looking for a good way to grab peoples attention and get them on the "good side" by dealing out lies. mabey they were just misinformed, i dont know, but the media is still a big group of morons.

rockstar SHOULD sue them. and not just the family, the media company or people who misinformed the public. im sure a bunch of families got in a riot over this and now see the true story, and dont kno what to make of it.

creative destructions
08-05-2004, 02:50 AM
Maybe the whole thing is a conspriacy made by Rockstar to win public empathy.

solarundies
08-05-2004, 06:31 AM
hey mycodesoft, that's pretty funny. I like the way u think :D

lestdog
08-05-2004, 09:07 AM
media sucks. plain and simple. looking for a good way to grab peoples attention and get them on the "good side" by dealing out lies. mabey they were just misinformed, i dont know, but the media is still a big group of morons.

rockstar SHOULD sue them. and not just the family, the media company or people who misinformed the public. im sure a bunch of families got in a riot over this and now see the true story, and dont kno what to make of it.

slander

Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone.
This wasn't slander, this was an opinion. Even though I have come to agree with you guys that a game is not responsible for murder, you are still out of bounds for some comments like these. Yes lets sue a family who had thier kid brutally murdered. What if this was your kid? Would you be so quick to say something like that?

Boone
08-05-2004, 10:36 PM
I seem to recall many an occasion when certain newspapers have lied to the public and have been made accountable for it - so how come the Daily Mail hasn't been in hot water so far? :curious:

lestdog
08-05-2004, 10:50 PM
I seem to recall many an occasion when certain newspapers have lied to the public and have been made accountable for it - so how come the Daily Mail hasn't been in hot water so far? :curious:
what exactly did they say or print that would constitute a case for defamation or slander? I'm curious.

markbones
08-06-2004, 01:24 AM
"Police believe LeBlanc murdered Pakeerah, whom he knew, to obtain money to pay back a drug-related debt."

Yep, must be the video games - they are corrupting our youth.
If video games are perceived to be that infulential, I wish someone would make one that would teach me how to break into a bank while avoiding all detection, bypassing all alarm and security measures, steal 100 billion dollars, move to a tropical island, learn to scuba dive, mix drinks, and live with some hot babe... or 2...

:twisted:

parallax
08-06-2004, 12:58 PM
slander

Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone.
This wasn't slander, this was an opinion. Even though I have come to agree with you guys that a game is not responsible for murder, you are still out of bounds for some comments like these. Yes lets sue a family who had thier kid brutally murdered. What if this was your kid? Would you be so quick to say something like that?
You are confusing the OPINION of games being to violent, with the FACT that the media misinformed its readers.
So technically, it is slander not by the parents though, but the press in this case. But then again, if Rockstar would sue a poor parent, that would be even more dreadfull then the game itself.

lestdog
08-06-2004, 01:13 PM
You are confusing the OPINION of games being to violent, with the FACT that the media misinformed its readers.
So technically, it is slander not by the parents though, but the press in this case. But then again, if Rockstar would sue a poor parent, that would be even more dreadfull then the game itself.first of all, slander is oral. What you are talking about is defamation and I still don't see it. I could be wrong, but please quote me a sentence or 2. Can anybody? From the articles presented so far I don't see anything that comes close. The press is just reporting what the parents and others are saying. In fact in the first article they said (not the press) that the guy was heard to be obessed with the game manhunt. Not anything about who actually owned the game. Are you guys talking about other articles from another source? Where are you guys coming up with slander and defamation?

DannyDreams
08-06-2004, 01:24 PM
You know what I have never played manhunt. Now after all of this I REALLY want to play it now. Rockstar is thinking that bad press is still good press. :thumbsup: :::leaves to go rent manhunt::::

PhilOsirus
08-07-2004, 04:47 PM
Ah! Post your review here afterward.

titaniumdave
08-07-2004, 05:11 PM
I can give you my review. :) Manhunt is boring after about an hour. You've only got a limited amount of ways to kill and everytime you kill some one its cuts to a short cinematic scene which takes you out of the game. Its a rental and it won't make you go out and do anything bad, unless you're crazy ofcourse. :D I'd give it a 2 out of 5.

samgrice
08-07-2004, 07:05 PM
Rockstar tould be bastards to try and sue the family, not that they will. but the daily mail has a long history of "bending" the truth, there one of those right-wing papers that would rather blame violence on games and films than say, oh poverty.

theve had it in for rockstar ever since the first gta.

Merrow
08-07-2004, 07:42 PM
The killer may have played Manhunt before he stole it from the victim. If so, the only possible innacuracy by the media would be a suggestion that the game inspired a murder. A trial would have to answer the question "Can a game cause violent behaviour?". I can not imagine Rockstar wanting to have such a trial.

Boone
08-07-2004, 07:47 PM
Re: Merrow.

Just to clarify - is it stated that the killer may have played it before hand, or is that just a suggestion from yourself?

Merrow
08-07-2004, 07:53 PM
I'm guessing that if the killer was a friend of the victim and liked the game there is a good chance that he played it before he stole it.

DaemonMagus
08-07-2004, 07:59 PM
Merrow, I think you're misinterpreting stuff. As I understand it, the killing was because of a robbery. A drug related robbery. The game was safe at home. There was no theft of the game involved. And your suggestion that the killer played the victim's game is not based on any facts that I've heard of.

Merrow
08-07-2004, 08:08 PM
My point was that the media stories contained two things that may be inacurate.

1. The killer played the game.
2. The game inspired a murder.

Despite misreporting who owned the game number 1 may still be true. If it is true then a trial would be all about point 2. Rockstar would not push for such a trial.

Boone
08-07-2004, 08:09 PM
Re: Merrow.

Ahhh...well, it would still come back to the fact that the victim shouldn't have been in possesion of Man Hunt. If he hadn't had the game in the first place - the robber wouldn't have stolen it.

Though if the victim and the murderer were "friends" in someway - he could very well have played it before hand. But that hasn't exactly been acknowledge yet...

Vushvush
08-07-2004, 08:18 PM
lol.... do you guys know what you sound like?

"If the killer read a review suggesting the violant nature of the game he may have flipped and killed him, so rockstar better watch out!"

Game = tasteless
Murder = unrelated
People = stupid

let the debate continue....

Boone
08-08-2004, 02:25 PM
Re: VushVush.

"lol.... do you guys know what you sound like?"

...emm... :blush: ...errr.... :sad: ....A Homosapian? :shrug:

t-man152
08-08-2004, 03:00 PM
well we should forgive the press for all those times they told the truth and made our lives better, and if they said that he played manhunt they obviously know what they are talking about.[/end sarcasm]

well it doesnt matter if they were wrong I dont think that the the stores that took manhunt off the shelves will be puting it back up.

PhilOsirus
08-08-2004, 06:33 PM
Good, maybe next time Rockstar will try to put up quality games for sale instead of that boring repetitive crap.

DaemonMagus
08-08-2004, 08:03 PM
why won't this thread die already...

Travelln
08-08-2004, 11:17 PM
hmm i wonder what video game Bush plays

Boone
08-09-2004, 08:15 PM
Re: Travlin.

Super Puzzle Fighter II! :buttrock:

PhilWesson
08-10-2004, 01:56 PM
I think that the fact that the game was even involved has little do do with the crime at hand. Because the murder was drug related, the unfortunate boy may as well have had thousands of illegally acquired mp3's on his machine as well. That doesn't really relate to what happened.

There are two issues in this situation:
1) A 14 year old was murded by a friend for money for drugs
2) A 14 year old had a copy of a game that is -supposed- to be restricted to legal adults.
There's not much of a connection between the two statements.

Rockstar's name and the title of the game shouldn't have even come up.

CGTalk Moderation
01-18-2006, 09:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.