Talk:Pardon

In the United States

Mention pardons at state level by individual governors in the US. Presidential pardons are only for federal crimes, I believe. --Jiang

It states in two places that pardons are at federal and state levels in the US is it not clear enough? Alex756 06:53, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

In some US states (e.g. Georgia) the pardon power is held not by the governor but by a state board. I don't have a source but I believe that in at least one case this was done to prevent the sale of pardons and/or clemency, whether in reaction to a specific scandal I don't know. 209.149.235.254 22:56, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Pardon v. amnesty

Removed:

Pardon is different from amnesty, in that pardoning does not cancel the legal guilt of the criminal, but merely the completion of the sentence, while amnesty removes all legal effects of the conviction.

This is definitely not true of the Presidential pardon under U.S. law; there has been considerable litigation resulting in case law stating that a pardon not only nullifies the conviction but also prevents the imposition of any civil sanctions for the underlying conduct. This amnesty distinction needs to be made jurisdiction-specific. Ellsworth 00:22, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

UK situation

I think what it says here is pretty confused. There is such a thing as the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, but surely this is something completely different from a royal pardon. It would be worth saying something about the judge's summing up in R. v Waddell, related to the Paddy Meehan case. PatGallacher 21:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree entirely with Pat Gallacher. Whoever wrote this is simply wrongJezzabr 21:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

blah blah!!!

---

'There are significant procedural differences in the royal pardon's use today, however.'

Yes, how are they used nowadays...Not very encyclopaedic if you don't actually say how it is used! The UK section of the article is tiny! And what about all the people who fought/still fight for a pardon for family members who deserted during wartime? Ben davison 22:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

---

'A pardon is no longer considered to remove the conviction itself, but only removes the penalty which was imposed.'

This is inconsistent with pardoning dead deserters. Maybe someone can clarify the correct situation

---

This section is incorrect and incomplete. It says only the Home Secretary, Defence Secretary and Scottish First Minister can recommend a pardon - yet the High Court ruled last year that the *Justice Secretary* has the right to recommend a pardon for someone who was convicted abroad and brought back to the UK to finish his sentence.

Because of this, and also the other inconsitincies mentioned above, it would be very useful if someone could re-write the whole UK section. Preferably someone from the UK, with proper knowledge on the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.117.237 (talk) 16:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Ordering non-NPOV

The sections on national pardons should be sorted alphabetically (or by some other criteria) not in the order they are added. --Philip Baird Shearer 11:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC) Agree Ossie 01:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Reprieve

Is there a difference between a pardon and a reprieve? Fishal 03:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC) Yes there is a difference. A pardon is to completely forgive someone for their crime and a reprieve is the act of lessening the penalty of the crime without forgiving the crime itself.

That's a commutation. A reprieve is actually to delay the beginning of the punishment. Look it up in any dictionary. 72.75.91.17 (talk) 04:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Rehabilitation of Offenders Act

Any idea why this redirects here? The "Rehabilitation of Offenders Act of 1974" is a UK Law that dictates when criminal convictions are considered "spent" and no longer need to be reported to the public. It is not in any sense a pardon. --Kitsonk 01:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC) Ford is kool I need help!! I'm trying to figure out how the pardon process works and I'm trying to do it myself without paying attorney fees to have it done. If anyone has any information regarding this situation please give me some feedback. Thank You--[user: stinkyporter]3:54, 27 December 2006

Mirza Tahir Hussain

President Musharraff of Pakistan has just lifted the death penalty on Mirza Tahir Hussain. I was wondering if there should be an entry on Pakistan here, as Musharaff's overturning of the Sharia courts may turn out to be historically significant? In any event, pardons in Islamic countries under Islamic law should be discussed, I feel, as this subject is quite relevant and, I am sure, would be of interest to many. abdullahazzam

Christianity

I don't think the religious aspect is appropriate for this article. Maybe its own article or under some other, related Christian article, but given that this is under the criminal procedure banner... Well, just my thoughts. Mkilly 22:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (again)

As mentioned above, this piece of UK law should not redirect here. It badly needs its own article - can anyone sufficiently knowledgeable reading this write one? Apart from anything else, it should be pointed out that the RoO Act does not apply when a British citizen travels to the US - meaning that even a "spent" conviction disqualifies one from being eligible for the Visa Waiver Program. This is somewhat controversial in the UK, though not half as much so as the fact that people who have been arrested even if released without charge are also ineligible. As far as I know the UK does not discriminate in this last way against US citizens travelling here. 86.143.52.79 14:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The RoO Act already has its own article, at Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. I have adjusted the redirect from "Rehabilitation of Offenders Act" to point to it.--George Burgess 21:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Pardoning: Christianity versus Feudal societies?

Does anybody know whether the idea of pardoning springs from the christian roots of the countries mentioned in the article or whether it springs from the feudal/aristocratic heritage of the states in discussion.

Does it exist in Arab, Asian, African societies as well —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.61.134.136 (talk) 12:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

Can...

the president pardon himself?

It seems so: [1] Mdiamante (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe so, or Richard Nixon would have. Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon; one of the first things he did in office.70.162.46.94 (talk) 20:56, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

was Libby pardoned? how controversial?

first, was he really pardoned? is a pardon the same as a commutation of sentence? Second, how can it be 'controversial' when the news is barely out? you need at least a day or two, don't you, to get sources that support the statement that it is controversial.142.68.47.29 23:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Category changes

Since the article does not mention christianity or other theology except for the word church, I removed the categories theology and christian theology. I am sure they could be added back if they did reflect any theology in later revisions. I'll leave the tags alone on this talk page however. Sultec (talk) 11:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Excessive linking to columnist's blog -- September 2010

I have removed edits made by one of a number of blocked sockpuppets that have been spamming Wikipedia with Jacob M Appel-related links or references. The article already contains two references to Appel's Huffington Post column, and adding his name and quote to the article gives Appel and his views a prominence or recognized expertise that doesn't appear to exist -- he's not widely mentioned in mainstream media or other reliable sources on this or any other subject that I can find. I'm not opposed to Appel's views being included in the article, but without any third-party verification, the content and links seem excessive. Flowanda | Talk 06:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

The point is to showcase diverse ideas, I believe HOLLgu (talk) 21:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)