MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022994503 · doi:10.1080/13642980802533158

Child rape as a crime against humanity: challenging the United States Supreme Court reasoning in<i>Kennedy</i>v.<i>Louisiana</i>

2009· article· en· W2022994503 on OpenAlexaff
Sonja C. Grover

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Human Rights · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTorture, Ethics, and Law
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionalityTortureSupreme courtDignityHomicideCriminologyLawJurisprudenceCrimes against humanityHarmPolitical scienceLife imprisonmentHuman rightsState (computer science)HumanityDeportationSociologyPoison controlInternational lawImmigrationSuicide preventionWar crimePrisonMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper argues, in accord with evolving international human rights jurisprudence, that child rape is a form of torture and meets the criteria for a crime against humanity even when committed by a private individual if part of a pattern within the State. Hence, the view of the majority of the Supreme Court of the United States (USSC) in Kennedy v. Louisiana that child rape where there is no loss of life is a crime of lesser moral depravity than is homicide or certain non-homicide crimes against the State is fallacious. It is respectfully argued that the majority in Kennedy inappropriately conflated the issue of the constitutionality or lack of constitutionality of the death penalty for non-homicide crimes with the issue of the assessment of the gravity of the crime of child rape per se where there is no loss of life. It is contended further that the latter USSC faulty analysis creates a diminution of the factual reality of child rape and undermines respect for the human dignity of the child.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Human RightsSame topicTorture, Ethics, and LawFrench-language works237,207