Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Carnal Crimes: Sexual Assault Law in Canada, 1900–1975 Carolyn Strange Carnal Crimes: Sexual Assault Law in Canada, 1900–1975. Constance Backhouse. Toronto: Irwin Law, 2008. Pp. 442, $55.00 Backhouse has done it again: produced a major work of legal history written and designed to appeal to a broad audience, from Supreme Court justices to readers simply interested in the Canadian criminal justice system’s prior ways of dealing with sexual assault. How does she do it? Because the book operates at three levels it can be approached effectively as three books. The one most will read comprises nine chapters, which examine in detail individual cases of sexual assault, and an introduction and conclusion that ties them together by highlighting their illustrative significance. Readers with greater interest in the historical and legal context in which Backhouse situates her selected cases will turn to the second, near-book-length resource of the endnotes (thirty-seven densely packed pages). This would have been impossible had a publisher other than the Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History taken on the project. For anyone wishing to follow the trail to the 1,202 cases she unearthed through her meticulous law report searches and her intensive archival research, Backhouse’s personal website provides a full listing. The result is a benchmark resource for further study and analysis, produced by an extraordinarily generous scholar. Carnal Crimes begins where Petticoats and Prejudice (1991) left off, and it follows Backhouse’s well-established method of approaching larger themes in law through individual cases. In her earlier work she exposed the ways in which nineteenth-century criminal law failed to deliver justice to women exposed to sexual violence. This new work extends that argument, but the framing is different, since the book covers the period of 1900 until 1975 – the year when Canadian criminal law first responded to feminist concerns over sexist laws in an era [End Page 753] when efforts to reorient the criminal justice system toward victims’ experiences were gathering momentum. Her nine cases highlight the issues that prompted those reforms, particularly the onerous burden of corroboration imposed on complainants and the intrusive scrutiny into the character and sexual history of women and children who claimed to have been abused. The legacy of seventeenth-century English jurist Matthew Hale’s famous dictum that rape is ‘an accusation easily to be made’ clearly lingered in the minds of the men who dealt with sexual assault cases before the 1970s, and not just defence lawyers zealously defending clients, but also Crown attorneys and police officers whose duty it was to gather evidence and prosecute credible cases. Several of the cases Backhouse presents ended in convictions, but each of those was successfully appealed. Indeed, as she and others in the field have established, the conviction rate for all forms of sexual assault, and rape in particular (which carried a maximum penalty of death until 1954), was substantially lower than rates for comparable indictable offences over the early- to mid-twentieth century. Remarkably little changed over time. But this is a work about people, not numbers and trends, and Backhouse’s storytelling skill is the key to her crossover appeal. General readers and students of history and gender studies will be led effectively through law’s complex operations with the aid of compelling and frequently harrowing accounts of violence and coercion. Although Backhouse recounts the scenarios that led to complaints of sexual assault by synthesizing and quoting from depositions, trial transcripts, and expert testimony, she keeps her spotlight on the law and the legal personalities involved in each case. Law here is not an abstract force or a set of principles applied to unique fact situations; rather, Backhouse’s criminal justice system is run by men operating on an uneven playing field that made victories for victims a rarity and failed utterly to protect women and children. Each of the cases Backhouse selects vividly supports her argument, and one can hear her accusatory voice in the testimony of Mary Burton in 1907. This complainant, a working-class woman from the wrong side of town, responded to a battering cross-examination into her unsavoury reputation with remarkable spirit and...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,018 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».