Talk:Innocent prisoner's dilemma

This article is written in Liberian English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, realize, analyze, center, defense) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 June 2012. The result of the discussion was keep.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Correction and Detention Facilities (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Correction and Detention FacilitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesTemplate:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesCorrection and Detention Facilities articles

a note to helpers

please do go ahead and knock yourselves out :) I am in no way an ownership kind of person, and cases and discussion about this subject is plentiful. Penyulap ☏ 19:30, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

overview of the conference

dynamics

The article is looking at two countries in particular just at the moment, although there are certainly a lot of others to cover, like the approaches taken in Germany, China and Sharia law to name just a few possibilities.

I have seen some editors get excited over wp:engvar and it's often the case that some British and American editors get over-excited on this topic. So to extinguish the dynamic now, I'll pop a var notice on to illustrate the var of the article. There are enough editors now to make suggestions, and please do feel free to do as you please changing it, or supporting it, or not commenting as you wish. No changes to the article are needed.

Editors might be tempted to go and read up on Liberia before commenting or making changes, but I assure you it's not necessary, and note that if in the future there was an excited discussion about changing away from Liberian, the participants would be obliged to do some study they might not have otherwise wanted to do in order to be impolite to each other. I know perfectly well what I have been adding to the article in phrases and style, but don't see the need to draw attention to the numerous examples of the variant in the article, as the problem has already been solved by the act of opening discussion on the issue at this point. It is actually solved now whether there is any further comment on the topic or not. Any suggestions for change that are made, I will agree with in order to assist in establishing a consensus which can be pointed to in the future. Penyulap ☏ 04:53, 6 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Guantanamo captives

Guantanamo captives are in an even worse situation than the wrongfully convicted individuals described in this article.

Under the Guantanamo system the USA reserves the right to continue to hold captives indefinitely -- potentially for the rest of their lives, even if they are tried and found innocent. However, those who plead guilty receive a definite release date. David Hicks and Salem Ahmed Hamdan, the first two suspects to be convicted, both agreed to plea deals. Both served approximately less than one further year. Hicks wrote a book upon his release, and the Australian government initiated steps to make sure he didn't profit from sales of the book. It recently dropped its efforts to block his profiting after acknowledging his confession was coerced, and would not stand up in an Australian court.

I am wondering whether adding Hick's case to this article would make sense. Geo Swan (talk) 11:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Factual innocence

In the United States the reality of a person being innocent, called "factual innocence" is not sufficient reason for the justice system to release a prisoner

I'm not sure this is the best source, and it is not very well represented. The source is talking about death penalty law and an opinion about "actual innocence", not "factual innocence". This has more to do with why states prohibit the death penalty. Viriditas (talk) 11:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possible connection

The topic seems to be related to the concept of The Alford Plea. Maybe it should be included as a "see also" link? 174.71.18.248 (talk) 07:15, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Innocent prisoner's dilemma. 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: 5 June 2024).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Innocent prisoner's dilemma. 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120829035350/http://www.newstatesman.com/200303100020 to http://www.newstatesman.com/200303100020

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: 5 June 2024).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

which State

Decisions by the State Board of Pardons and Paroles regarding its treatment of prisoners who may be actually innocent have been criticized by the international community.

This is sourced to a story about one case in Georgia. It should be noted that there may be fifty State Boards of Pardons and Paroles, though it's unlikely that they all have the same name. —Tamfang (talk) 22:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]