Stevenson's 'The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' as a Criminal Law Text
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This short review of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, (1886) talks about how Robert Louis Stevenson's novella may be used as a text in a criminal law class. Jekyll's written confession is ambiguous about his responsibility for the murder he has committed. He seems to deny that he was morally sane at the time of the murder, yet he also makes a point of declaring that he had voluntarily stripped [him]self of all those balancing instincts that would have allowed himself to control himself, and he compares himself to drunkard. Jekyll further complicates the issue by tracing his violent impulses back to the thorough and primitive duality of humans in general. Around the time the novella was published, English courts were starting to ask whether mental conditions resulting from voluntary intoxication may negate specific intent. Students may be provoked to think more deeply about criminal responsibility by reading Jekyll and Hyde in relation to those judgments, and in relation to more recent judgments in which a party's voluntary act triggered the manifestation of a preexisting illness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".