MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1897452689 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v8n3p158

Modernising the Law: Breaches of the Peace & Justices of the Peace

2015· article· en· W1897452689 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Graham McBain

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawMagistrateLegislationPolitical scienceEconomic JusticePrincipal (computer security)Criminal lawCriminal justiceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionJustices of the Peace ('JP's) -also called magistrates -are the 'work-horses' of the criminal law.They handle the lesser criminal offences.The office of JP derives -at least -from the early 14 th century (and, possibly, considerably earlier).From an early time, JP's were encumbered with a heterogeneous collection of duties, such that they were sometimes performing criminal -and sometimes civil -tasks.Presently, there are some 26,000 JP's serving throughout England and Wales.It is an unsalaried post, although expenses are paid.Over the course of the centuries, many legal texts have been written on JP's (see Appendix A).However, they are now dated.Today, the principal practitioner texts comprise:The purpose of this article is to consider how the law relating to JP's may be consolidated and improved in order to modernise it -as well as made it more accessible to JP's, lawyers and laymen.In particular, the following is asserted:  Concepts.The Germanic (and Anglo-Saxon) concepts of the 'peace' and 'breach of the peace' are no longer applicable (or intelligible) since, today, breach of the peace ('BOTP') means (if anything), breach of the criminal law.Further, reference to a magistrate (or judge) is more appropriate and intelligible than to a 'justice of the peace' which title should now be dispensed with in legislation;  Criminal Offence.BOTP was never -even from Anglo-Saxon times -a criminal offence in itself.3 Instead, it referred to any offence which -if not punished -would provoke a blood feud (faida);  Frankpledge & Hue & Cry.These common law obligations -long obsolete -should be abolished;  Justices of the Peace Act 1361.This Act is spent -including the right of JP's to bind over for good behaviour.It should be repealed since the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 now covers all (non-obsolete) matters referred in the former;  Justice of the Peace Act 1968, s 1(7).This section should be amended to exclude reference to binding over for 'BOTP' and for 'good behaviour'.Instead, to make it more intelligible in modern times, it should refer to the power to bind over where a person: (a) has committed a crime; or (b) threatened to commit a crime; or (c) incited another to commit a crime;  BOTP-Duty of Constable.The common law duty of a constable to prevent 'breaches of the peace' should be replaced by a statutory duty, requiring a constable to 'do his best to prevent the commission of crime' (following Watkins LJ in Howell);  Citizen -Arrest without Warrant.This common law power should be abolished since the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 ('PACE 1984'), s 24A now adequately covers matters; 1 The first edition of this work was S Stone, The Justices' Pocket Manual (1 st ed, 1842). 2 The first edition of this work was in 2004.3 Under Anglo-Saxon law, acts that would otherwise lead to a blood feud (i.e.acts which 'breached the peace') were punished.Because Anglo-Saxon law did not separate civil, from criminal, law, there was no direct reference to 'breaches of the criminal law', as such.www.ccsenet.org/jpl

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.018
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0140.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207