博弈論 中的 囚徒困境
之前幾次在網友處，提起 博弈論 中的 囚徒困境 論。
又另有一次，已經是中一， 大家都有十二三歲， 那年當老師背著寫黑板時（其實是用Marker筆寫在百版上)，全班大部份同學，互射碼子，有一隻碼子誤中老師，大乜鑊！ 老師又是出『連坐』這一招，一係自首，否則全班要留堂。 大家已經十二三歲，懂得做男生要有『雷氣』，無人肯做二五仔，其實無人知道邊個射中老師，好了，老師下不了臺， 老羞成怒，放學後真的整班學生四十幾人，全班排隊去教員室罰企。
校車，保母車，白牌車，私家車司機們入來了解，發生了甚麼事，繼而通知家長，不久有部分家長們抵達，成百人塞在教員室裡面，連校長修士都驚動了，由修士樓上宿舍，落來睇下發生乜嘢事，真係慘，又要顧存老師面子，又要注重紀律，又要平釋事件，最後先放學生回家。 記得好像在期考這一科每人降一個 GRADE，但不用記過，真的還是假的無人知，亦無人續個去問，如果是真，無份射碼子的同學都幾冤枉。
『A Beautiful Mind (film), 根據 A Beautiful Mind (book) 』本書拍成，就是講 博弈宗師，一九九四年 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences Winner 諾貝爾獎 得獎者，John Nash 的經歷，阿尊一九二八年生，尚還在世。
人生本來就是一場博弈，選擇和被選擇，互相交替，成與敗，得或失，就像玩遊戲 Game 一場, 尚未釘蓋，都未能有最後定論！
微豆兄 提出 Plea Bargaining 這個 Topic 與 囚徒困境 的博弈類同，但因為有了減刑的誘因，可以胡亂說謊把無辜的人拉入案件，增加自己的減刑機會。
【維基百科】Plea bargaining in the United States is very common; the vast majority of criminal cases in the United States are settled by plea bargain rather than by a jury trial.
They have also been increasing in frequency—they rose from 84% of federal cases in 1984 to 94% by 2001. Plea bargains are subject to the approval of the court, and different States and jurisdictions have different rules. Game theory has been used to analyze the plea bargaining decision.
The constitutionality of plea bargaining was established by Brady v. United States in 1970, although the Supreme Court warned that plea incentives which were sufficiently large or coercive as to over-rule defendants' abilities to act freely, or used in a manner giving rise to a significant number of innocent people pleading guilty, might be prohibited or lead to concerns over constitutionality. Santobello v. New York added that when plea bargains are broken, legal remedies exist.
Several features of the American justice system tend to promote plea bargaining. The adversarial nature of the system puts judges in a passive role, in which they are completely dependent upon the parties to develop the factual record and cannot independently discover information with which to assess the strength of the case against the defendant.
The parties thus can control the outcome of the case by exercising their rights or bargaining them away. The lack of compulsory prosecution also gives prosecutors greater discretion. And the inability of crime victims to mount a private prosecution and their limited ability to influence plea agreements also tends to encourage plea bargaining. Prosecutors have been described as monopsonists.
The shadow-of-trial argument states that plea agreements merely reflect the outcome that would have transpired had the case gone to trial. For example, if the accused faces 10 years and has a 50% chance of losing in court, then an agreement will result in a five-year sentence, less some amount deducted for saving the government the cost of trial.
Theoretically, the shadow-of-trial should work even better in criminal cases than in civil cases, because civil judgments are discretionary, while criminal judgments are often regulated by mandatory minima and sentencing guidelines, making sentences more predictable.
A counter-argument is that criminal sentencing laws are "lumpy", in that the sentencing ranges are not as precise as the dollars-and-cents calibration that can be achieved in civil case settlements. Furthermore, because some defendants facing small amounts of prison time are jailed pending trial, they may find it in their interests to plead guilty so as to be sentenced to time served, or in any event to end up serving less time than they would serve waiting for trial.
Outcomes in criminal cases are also made less predictable by the fact that, while a plaintiff in a civil case has a financial incentive to seek the largest judgment possible, a prosecutor does not necessarily have an incentive to pursue the most severe sentence possible.
The United States Supreme Court has recognized plea bargaining as both an essential and desirable part of the criminal justice system. The benefits of plea-bargaining are said to be obvious: the relief of court congestion, alleviation of the risks and uncertainties of trial, and its information gathering value.
However, in 1975 the Attorney-General of Alaska, Avrum Gross, ordered an end to all plea-bargaining; subsequent attorneys-general continued the practice. Similar consequences were observed in New Orleans, Ventura County, California, and in Oakland County, Michigan, where plea bargaining has been terminated.
Some legal scholars argue that plea bargaining is unconstitutional because it takes away a person's right to a trial by jury. In fact, Justice Hugo Black once noted that, in America, the defendant “has an absolute, unqualified right to compel the State to investigate its own case, find its own witnesses, prove its own facts, and convince the jury through its own resources. Throughout the process, the defendant has a fundamental right to remain silent, in effect challenging the State at every point to ‘Prove it!’” By limiting the powers of the police and prosecutors, the Bill of Rights safeguards freedom.
Plea bargaining is also criticized, particularly outside the United States, on the grounds that its close relationship with rewards, threats and coercion potentially endangers the correct legal outcome.
The theoretical work based on the prisoner's dilemma is one reason why, in many countries, plea bargaining is forbidden. Often, precisely the prisoner's dilemma scenario applies: it is in the interest of both suspects to confess and testify against the other suspect, irrespective of the innocence of the accused. Arguably, the worst case is when only one party is guilty—here, the innocent one is unlikely to confess, while the guilty one is likely to confess and testify against the innocent.
It has been argued that plea bargaining benefits society by ensuring that the guilty are not acquitted.
Another argument against plea bargaining is that it may not actually reduce the costs of administering justice. For example, if a prosecutor has only a 25% chance of winning his case and sending the defendant away to prison for 10 years, he may make a plea agreement for a one-year sentence; but if plea bargaining is unavailable, he may drop the case completely.
除了犯人可以用利用 Plea Bargaining 換取較短刑期，有時也會無辜被冤枉的可以被帶上法庭，牽涉入內的人要經過經年的法律程序，又要延聘律師付出金錢時間心力，家庭事業受到不必要的影響，最終才可以打甩罪名。
近日 嗜悲 追看一套 朝日電視的日劇：天使與惡魔 日文：天使 と 惡魔
故事：天使 と 惡魔
天使 と 惡魔 司法取引 預告片 TV Asahi
瘋人瘋語「我離港前到過一間精神科醫院。當時有位病人禮貌地問，一個以作為世上最悠久民主政體而自傲的國家，如何能夠將此地交給一個政治制度非常不同的國家，且既沒諮詢當地公民，又沒給予他們民主的前景，好讓他們捍衞自己的將來。一個隨行同事說，奇怪，香港提出最理智問題的人，竟在精神科醫院。」彭定康 金融時報 “During a visit to a mental hospital before I left Hong Kong, a patient politely asked me how a country that prided itself on being the oldest democracy in the world had come to be handing over his city to another country with a very different system of government, without either consulting the citizens or giving them the prospect of democracy to safeguard their future. Strange, said one of my aides, that the man with the sanest question in Hong Kong is in a mental hospital.”Chris Patten Financial Times
Non Chinese literate friends, please simply switch to English Version provided by LOUSY Google Translation
Please participate in the unregistered demography survey of visitors at the right hand side bar. You are: ？