Evidence 9cef8f3dfafd directly shows the heading 'Python releases by version number' with a 'Python 3.15.0' entry, which maps exactly to the claim that the release is listed on python.org under that heading. The prosecution's objections concern the absence of a capture timestamp and the truncated listing ('Click for more'). These limit how current the listing is, but they do not undermine the claim as stated, which only requires that the entry appears in the listing.

Missing: A capture timestamp or retrieval date for the python.org page, to confirm the listing is current as of the present.

The 'listed on python.org' component is supported by 9cef8f3dfafd. The 'most recent' component is unsupported: no evidence passage provides a comparison set of other versions, so recency is inferred from position in a truncated list. The 'stable' component is also unsupported. The 'bugfix' label in b4d0895897c2 describes a maintenance status and does not establish that 3.15.0 has been released as a stable build. The defense's reading that 'bugfix' is consistent with a stable line is an inference, not a verified fact. Both supporting passages derive from the same source (aaf60ea1806e), so they do not independently corroborate recency or status.

Missing: A full version listing showing 3.15.0 is the newest entry, evidence that 3.15.0 has been released (not just scheduled) as a stable build, and a capture date showing the page was retrieved after the release date.

The date October 9, 2026 appears consistently in the cited passages, so the date itself is supported as the date shown on python.org and in the PEP 790 schedule. However, the claim calls it the 'official release date', and the evidence does not establish that. b4d0895897c2 cites PEP 790, a schedule document, so the date may be a planned target rather than a finalized release record. The date is also in the future relative to the evidence, and the claim does not qualify it as scheduled or expected. Three of the passages come from a single source (aaf60ea1806e), so they do not provide independent confirmation. The 'bugfix' label alongside a future date adds to the uncertainty about whether the date is settled.

Missing: Confirmation that the date is an official, finalized release date rather than a planned one, preferably from the PEP or a release announcement, plus independent sources beyond the single python.org page.

The passage places 'bugfix' in the same row as '3.15', which is a relevant association. However, the fragment has no column headers, so it does not show that 'bugfix' is the status field rather than another value. The passage also has no retrieval date, so the status cannot be confirmed as current. The claim that the status appears on python.org depends on source_id aaf60ea1806e, which is referenced but not shown in the evidence. No passage contradicts the claim.

Missing: A labeled table or page capture showing column headers, a URL or domain identifying python.org, a retrieval timestamp, and the text of source aaf60ea1806e.

The passage contains '2031-10' in the 3.15 row, which matches the claimed month and year. The column is unlabeled, however, and adjacent dates (2026-10-09 and the release-style entries) show that the row contains several dates. Calling '2031-10' the end-of-life date is an inference from position and format. The defense acknowledges this inference. No passage contradicts the claim.

Missing: A labeled source showing that the 2031-10 value is the end-of-life field for Python 3.15, along with any note on whether the date is a projection.

'PEP 790' appears in the same row as '3.15', which establishes adjacency. The passage does not state that the PEP documents Python 3.15, and the PEP's own text is absent from the record. The phrase 'documented under' therefore goes beyond what the passage shows. The record supports only a row-level association, not the specific documentation relationship claimed.

Missing: The text of PEP 790 or a labeled statement that it covers Python 3.15 documentation or schedule.

The passage shows '3.16' next to 'pre-release' in a headerless table fragment, which supports the status pairing. It does not show that the listing is on python.org, because the source page (aaf60ea1806e) is not quoted. The claim also states present-tense status without an as-of date, and the prosecution notes that the status may have changed.

Missing: The full text or URL of source aaf60ea1806e confirming the python.org domain, the page's capture or retrieval date, and labeled column headers showing that the status field belongs to the version row.

The passage contains the date '2027-10-06' labeled '(planned)', which matches the claim's wording and qualifier. However, the passage does not state that this column is the release date rather than another milestone, does not name its source as authoritative (such as the release schedule or PEP), and has no retrieval date to establish that it is current.

Missing: Column headers or text identifying the 2027-10-06 entry as the release date for 3.16, the authoritative schedule source (such as PEP 826 or the release calendar), and a retrieval timestamp.

The passage directly states that the main branch is the future Python 3.16 and is the only branch accepting new features, which covers the substance of both components. The claim has three gaps. It drops the passage's 'currently', which makes a time-dependent statement timeless. It attributes the statement to CPython, but the passage does not name CPython and the source (ee21f8c8653b) is not quoted in full. The exclusivity claim is also not scoped by date or by policy (for example, bug-fix backports to release branches).

Missing: Full text of source ee21f8c8653b naming CPython, a retrieval date, and the development policy stating whether any other branch can accept features or whether release branches accept only fixes.

Evidence 9acbaf04a563 directly states that once a version is fully released, bug fixes and security fixes are accepted, and that this phase is also called stable release. This maps closely to the claim as written. The prosecution's objections concern a time bound and an 'entire phase' scope that the claim does not assert. The claim says fixes are accepted during the stable phase, not throughout it. Evidence f500b56937ae, as the prosecution notes, implies bug-fix acceptance stops after about two years, which is consistent with the claim and does not contradict it. The remaining weakness is that the source is undated, so the claim's current validity cannot be confirmed from the arguments presented.

Missing: A dated or versioned source confirming the policy is current. Optionally, an explicit statement of when bug-fix acceptance ends, so the claim's temporal scope is clear.

Evidence f500b56937ae supports the two-year transition to security-only fixes and the cessation of binary releases. It does not explicitly state that the two-year rule applies to 'Python versions 3.13 and later.' The parenthetical gives an 18-month period for versions before 3.13, which implies the two-year rule applies from 3.13 onward, but this is an inference, not a stated scope. The defense itself acknowledges that the passage does not state the 3.13+ scope explicitly. The prosecution's tension argument with claim 3af60d74fce9 does not produce a contradiction. Claim 3af60d74fce9 describes bug-fix acceptance during the stable phase without a time bound, and this claim describes what follows the two-year mark. The two are compatible. The source is undated, so the durations' current validity is unverified.

Missing: An explicit statement that the two-year rule applies to Python 3.13 and later. A dated or versioned source confirming the 2-year and 18-month figures are current. Optionally, a source addressing bug-fix policy after two years, and the end-of-life point when security fixes stop.

Evidence: 3 · Sources: 2 · Verified claims: 0 · Contradictions: 0

Evidence: 2 · Sources: 2 · Verified claims: 0 · Contradictions: 0

Evidence: 8 · Sources: 2 · Verified claims: 0 · Contradictions: 0

No contradictions detected.

Criteria: A specific version number (e.g., X.Y.Z) is identified from python.org's official downloads page or release listings, with the source URL and retrieval date noted. Pre-release, beta, and release-candidate versions are excluded.

Criteria: A calendar date is confirmed from an official Python source, such as the python.org release page, the release announcement, or the Python Developer's Guide release schedule, for the exact version identified in the first subquestion. The date should be cited with its source.

Criteria: The evidence confirms that no newer final (non-pre-release) Python version has been published as of the date checked, using python.org or the Python Developer's Guide. Any newer patch or feature release is identified, or the absence of one is documented with the date of verification.

Limitations

• Search coverage depends on Brave Search results and retrievable public pages
• Certificate metrics measure internal claim-to-evidence integrity, not external truth