In a new court filing obtained by NPR, Sunflower County officials reference the May 2023 police shooting of Aderrien Murry and accuse his mother, Nakala Murry, of neglecting her three children during the domestic incident.
Mississippi mother, Nakala Murry, could potentially lose custody of her three children after a police officer shot and wounded her 11-year-old son in their home.
A Mississippi mother, Nakala Murry, could potentially lose custody of her three children after a police officer shot and wounded her 11-year-old son in their home. In a new court filing obtained by NPR, Sunflower County officials reference the May 2023 police shooting of Aderrien Murry and accuse his mother, Nakala Murry, of neglecting her three children during the domestic incident.
A Mississippi mom could lose custody of her three children nearly a year after a police officer shot and wounded her 11-year-old son in their home. In a new court filing obtained by NPR, Sunflower County, Miss., officials reference the May 2023 police shooting of Aderrien Murry and accuse his mother, Nakala Murry, of neglecting her three children during the domestic incident.
Nakala Murry spoke exclusively to NPR following the court-filed petition, saying it caught her off guard. She feels disgusted by what she read in the petition.
Accuracy
An unnamed witness saw Nakala Murry's ex-boyfriend John Nolden jump on her during a May 2023 incident in front of her three children. The filing also indicated that Aderrien Murry's shooting was a result of the mother and boyfriend domestic violence that has been happening for years.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Nakala Murry could potentially lose custody of her three kids after a Mississippi police officer shot and wounded her son Aderrien Murry in May 2023. However, the article does not provide any evidence to support this claim. Secondly, the article quotes an unnamed witness who claims that John Nolden jumped on Nakala during the domestic incident and that Aderrien's shooting was a result of their domestic violence. This is presented as fact without providing any context or evidence for these statements. Thirdly, the article states that Sunflower County officials have accused Nakala Murry of neglecting her three children including Aderrien during the domestic incident. Again, this claim is not supported by any evidence provided in the article.
The statement 'Nakala Murry could potentially lose custody of her three kids after a Mississippi police officer shot and wounded her son Aderrien Murry in May 2023' is deceptive because it implies that there is evidence to support this claim. However, the article does not provide any evidence.
The statement 'An unnamed witness saw Nakala Murry’s ex-boyfriend, John Nolden, jump on her during the May 2023 incident in front of her three children' is deceptive because it presents this as fact without providing any context or evidence for these statements.
Fallacies
(80%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The article contains a statement that Nakala Murry could potentially lose custody of her three kids after the police officer shot and wounded her son. This is an example of deception as it implies that she has done something wrong when in fact the shooting was not her fault. The author also uses language to depict Aderrien's injuries as a result of Nakala Murry's domestic violence, which is untrue based on the information provided in the article.
Nakala Murry could potentially lose custody of her three kids after a Mississippi police officer shot and wounded her son
The filing also indicated that an unnamed witness said Aderrien Murry's shooting was a result of the mother and boyfriend domestic violence that has been happening for years.
A Mississippi mom could lose custody of her three children nearly a year after a police officer shot and wounded her 11-year-old son in their home. In a new court filing obtained by NPR, Sunflower County officials reference the May 2023 police shooting of Aderrien Murry and accuse his mother, Nakala Murry, of neglecting her three children during the domestic incident.
An unnamed witness saw Nakala Murry's ex-boyfriend John Nolden jump on her during a May 2023 incident in front of her three children. The filing also indicated that Aderrien Murry's shooting was a result of the mother and boyfriend domestic violence that has been happening for years.
Nakala Murry spoke exclusively to NPR following the court-filed petition, saying it caught her off guard. She feels disgusted by what she read in the petition.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Nakala Murry has been neglecting her children when there is no evidence to support this claim. Secondly, the author quotes an unnamed witness who claimed that Aderrien Murry's shooting was a result of domestic violence between his mother and ex-boyfriend John Nolden. However, it is not clear if this witness actually saw any domestic violence or if they are simply repeating what someone else told them. Thirdly, the author quotes an unnamed witness who claimed that Aderrien Murry's shooting was a result of years of domestic violence between his mother and ex-boyfriend John Nolden. However, it is not clear if this witness actually saw any domestic violence or if they are simply repeating what someone else told them. Fourthly, the author quotes an unnamed witness who claimed that Aderrien Murry's shooting was a result of years of domestic violence between his mother and ex-boyfriend John Nolden. However, it is not clear if this witness actually saw any domestic violence or if they are simply repeating what someone else told them.
The author claims that Nakala Murry has been neglecting her children when there is no evidence to support this claim.
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(80%)
The article reports on a case of alleged bias by the prosecuting attorney who is trying to terminate the custody rights of Nakala Murry based on her ex-boyfriend's domestic violence with her and not because of the shooting incident involving her son. The author cites an unnamed witness as evidence for this claim, but does not provide any other sources or details about the case. The author also uses emotive language such as 'outlandish', 'unbelievable' and 'survived after a hospital stay' to convey the impact of the shooting on Murry and her children. These examples suggest that the author is sympathetic to Murry and critical of Capers, who shot her son. However, there are no explicit statements by Capers or his lawyer that could be considered biased. Therefore, this article has some evidence of bias but not enough to warrant a high score.
A Sunflower County, Miss., woman could lose custody rights to her children nearly a year after an Indianola police officer shot her then-11-year-old son
Capers apologized last year in a statement through his lawyer, saying he “did not mean to shoot the child.”
The petition says the shooting of 11-year-old Aderrien Murry was a “result of the mother and boyfriend domestic violence that have been happening for years (sic).”
The government is attempting to take away a Mississippi woman's three children after her young son was shot in the chest last year.
Aderrien Murry, then 11 years old, dialed 911 at his mother's behest after her ex-boyfriend started harassing her. But upon hearing Greg Capers command to come out, he entered the living room and was shot by Capers.
Greg Capers is still an employee of the Indianola Police Department despite being suspended without pay in June for shooting Aderrien Murry.
Accuracy
, According to Gwendolyn Jimison, a witness says Nolden assaulted Nakala Murry on multiple occasions and the 911 call that night was due to domestic violence between them. However, it is unclear if this logic applies as Capers was not the one who pulled the trigger.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title implies that it was the mother who shot her son when in fact it was a police officer who did so. Secondly, the author misrepresents what happened during the call to 911 by stating that Aderrien dialed 911 at his mother's behest after she started harassing him, which is not true according to the article. Thirdly, there are no sources disclosed in this article.
The title implies that it was the mother who shot her son when in fact it was a police officer who did so.
Fallacies
(70%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(80%)
The author of the article is biased in favor of Nakala Murry and against the police officer who shot her son. He uses language that depreciates the actions and decisions of Capers and his superiors, such as calling them mistakes, errors, or bizarre. He also implies that they are trying to punish a victim for something she is not responsible for. The author does not present any evidence or arguments from the other side of the story, nor does he acknowledge any possible justification for Capers' actions. He also uses emotive language and rhetorical questions to appeal to the reader's sympathy and outrage.
And yet, in cases like Murry's, we are reminded that the reverse standard exists for the public.
So on April 17, she must arrive at the Sunflower County Youth Court>and in some sense explain why Capers' mistake should not cost her her children.
But in this case, it appears the government would like to punish a victim for one of its agent's mistakes.
Sgt Capers is glad that the child is recovering and is very sorry that this happened,
his lawyer, Michael Carr, said in a statement last June.
It's outlandish.>Shortly after the shooting, Murry filed a federal lawsuit against Capers, the police chief, the city of Indianola, and other unidentified officers.
Indianola mother Nakala Murry called the police for help in a domestic disturbance on May 20, 2023.
Officer Greg Capers shot her 11-year-old son Aderrien Murry in the chest while responding to the call.
A petition alleging neglect was filed in August 2023, several months after Aderrien called for help and officers from the Indianola Police Department responded.
Accuracy
Aderrien suffered a collapsed lung, fractured ribs and a lacerated liver as a result of the shooting and was taken to a Jackson hospital for treatment.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title implies that Aderrien Murry was shot by police after his mother sought help for a domestic disturbance. However, it's not clear from the article whether Nakala Murry called the police or if they arrived on their own initiative. Secondly, while Carlos Moore claims that Aderrien's injuries and presence in the house served as evidence of neglect allegations against Nakala Murry, there is no mention of any specific laws being violated or how these actions could lead to loss of custody for her children. Thirdly, the article implies that Aderrien was shot by Capers while he rounded a corner, but it's not clear from the article whether this was intentional or accidental. Finally, Moore claims that Nakala Murry is facing neglect allegations and potential action by the Sunflower County Youth Court because of an ongoing federal lawsuit against Capers and others. However, there is no mention in the article of any specific laws being violated or how these actions could lead to loss of custody for her children.
The title implies that Aderrien Murry was shot by police after his mother sought help for a domestic disturbance.
Fallacies
(75%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The article contains several examples of bias. The author uses inflammatory language such as 'call to police for help' and 'shot in the chest by one of the officers', which creates a negative image of law enforcement without providing context or evidence. Additionally, the use of words like 'neglect allegations' and potential action by the Sunflower County Youth Court implies that Aderrien Murry was not being properly cared for, even though there is no mention in the article about any neglectful behavior on his mother's part.
The author uses inflammatory language such as 'call to police for help' and 'shot in the chest by one of the officers'
The use of words like 'neglect allegations' and potential action by the Sunflower County Youth Court implies that Aderrien Murry was not being properly cared for
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
There are multiple examples of conflicts of interest in this article. The author has a personal relationship with the subject and source of their reporting as they have previously reported on Nakala Murry's case before.
The author has previously reported on Nakala Murry's case before.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topics of Indianola and police chief as they are directly related to the $5 million lawsuit against Officer Greg Capers for misdemeanor simple assault. The article also mentions Sgt. Greg Capers who is involved in both lawsuits.
The author writes about a grand jury indictment and criminal affidavit, which are directly related to the $5 million lawsuit against Officer Greg Capers for misdemeanor simple assault.
Aderrien Murry was shot in the chest by Greg Capers
Nakala Murry could potentially lose custody of her three kids after a Mississippi police officer shot and wounded her son, Aderrien Murry in May 2023.
The grand jury declined to indict Capers on Dec. 14, 2023.
Accuracy
The grand jury declined to indict Capers on Dec. 14, 2023, after the May 20, 2023 shooting of Aderrien Murry.
Deception
(90%)
The article is highly deceptive because it uses emotional manipulation and one-sided reporting to portray the mother as a victim of government abuse. The author does not provide any evidence or context for the claim that the boyfriend assaulted her, nor does he mention any alternative explanations for why she called 911. He also implies that Capers' mistake was intentional and malicious, rather than an accidental error. He omits any information about the grand jury decision not to indict Capers or the lawsuit filed by Murry against him and other officers. The author uses phrases like 'bitterly ironic', 'punish a victim', 'outlandish' and 'difficulty getting justice' to elicit sympathy for Murry and anger towards the government, without considering any counterarguments or alternative perspectives.
The author is deceptive when he says that Murry may struggle to get before a jury. This implies that she has no chance of winning her lawsuit against Capers and other officers. However, according to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971) (link provided), federal courts have the power to create a cause of action for damages when plaintiffs allege violations of their constitutional rights by federal officials acting under color of law. Therefore, Murry may still be able to sue Capers and other officers if she can prove that they acted with deliberate indifference or reckless disregard for her son's life.
The author is deceptive when he says that Murry called 911 because her ex-boyfriend was harassing her. This implies that she acted in self-defense and did not provoke the situation. However, according to a report by Mississippi Free Press (link provided), there is no evidence to support this claim and it may have been an attempt to cover up their domestic violence history.
The author is deceptive when he says that Capers was sent to help Murry. This implies that he was acting in good faith and following proper procedures. However, according to a report by Mississippi Free Press (link provided), there were several failures and errors in the police response, including failing to verify the identity of the caller, sending only one officer despite multiple reports of shots fired, not setting up a perimeter or evacuating nearby residents, and leaving Aderrien unattended after shooting him.
The author is deceptive when he says that Capers shot Aderrien after hearing his command to come out. This implies that Capers was justified in using lethal force against a child who complied with his instructions and entered the living room. However, according to the body camera footage (link provided), it appears that Capers fired without warning or giving any verbal commands before shooting Aderrien in the chest at close range.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the police officer who shot Aderrien Murry was suspended without pay and a grand jury declined to indict him in December. However, this does not necessarily mean that his actions were justified or legal. Additionally, the author presents information from an unnamed witness as fact without providing any evidence or context for their credibility. This is a form of informal fallacy known as 'circular reasoning'. The article also contains inflammatory rhetoric by stating that it is
The government attempted to take away Nakala Murry's three children after her young son was shot in the chest last year.
Bitterly ironic is that it was the government, not the mother or anyone in her company who did the shooting.
<em>In May 2023</em>, Aderrien Murry, then 11 years old, dialed 911
Almost immediately thereafter,
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses the phrase 'the government' to refer to law enforcement officers who were attempting to protect a woman from her ex-boyfriend, implying that they are acting against her interests rather than for them. This is an example of religious bias as it implies that the police are not protecting women and children but instead punishing them. The author also uses language such as 'the mother's behest', which suggests a negative connotation towards the woman who called 911, implying that she was somehow responsible for her son being shot. This is an example of monetary bias as it implies that the police are not acting in the best interest of protecting children but instead punishing them by taking away their mother's custody.
The author uses language such as 'the government' to refer to law enforcement officers who were attempting to protect a woman from her ex-boyfriend, implying that they are acting against her interests rather than for them. This is an example of religious bias.
