lundi 30 mars 2015

Innocent prisoner's dilemma

I know this is from Wiki but I have seen this in a number of wrongful conviction cases which we have discussed



http://ift.tt/1ETScRG

The innocent prisoner's dilemma, or 'Parole Deal', is a detrimental effect of a legal system in which admission of guilt can result in reduced sentences or early parole. When an innocent person is wrongly convicted of a crime, legal systems which need the individual to admit guilt, for example as a prerequisite step leading to parole, punish an innocent person for his integrity, and reward a person lacking in integrity. There have been many cases where innocent prisoners were given the choice between freedom, in exchange for admitting guilt, and remaining imprisoned and telling the truth. Individuals have died in prison rather than admit to crimes which they did not commit.



It has been demonstrated in Britain that prisoners who freely admit their guilt are more likely to re-offend than prisoners who maintain their innocence, yet parole officers perceive prisoners claiming innocence to be more likely to re-offend.



United States law professor Daniel Medwed says convicts who go before a parole board maintaining their innocence are caught in a Catch-22 which he calls "the innocent prisoner’s dilemma".[1] A false admission of guilt and remorse by an innocent person at a parole hearing may prevent a later investigation proving their innocence.[2]




So thoughts on solutions?





via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1G7FzXl

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire