Sentencing Aboriginal Offenders: Recognising Disadvantage and the Intergenerational Impacts of Colonisation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p><em>The ongoing issue of Aboriginal disadvantage, particularly the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people in Australian prisons warrants a change in sentencing practices and outcomes. There is a current failure by Australian Courts to properly account for the systemic disadvantage suffered by Aboriginal Australians during the sentencing process. Given the intergenerational impacts of colonisation and an arguable new generation of institutionalised Aboriginal children, consideration of the effects of colonisation is still largely relevant today. The High Court in Bugmy v The Queen<a href="#_ftn1"><strong>[1]</strong></a> and Munda v Western Australia<a href="#_ftn2"><strong>[2]</strong></a> have provided little assistance, however the law in Canada could assist Australian courts when it comes to sentencing Aboriginal offenders. </em></p> <div><br /> <hr size="1" /><div><p><a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> <em>Bugmy v The Queen</em> (2013) 302 ALR 192.</p></div> <div><p><a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> <em>Munda v Western Australia</em> (2013) 302 ALR 207.</p></div></div>
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it