The state, criminal justice politics and the Nova Scotia Royal Commission on the Donald Marshall, Jr., Prosecution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Donald Marshall, Jr., a sixteen-year old Micmac Indian, was wrongfully convicted of the murder of a Black youth named Sandy Seale in Sydney, Nova Scotia in 1971. Eleven years later, Marshall was exonerated, but at the same time, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeals blamed him for causing the miscarriage of justice. In 1986, the government of Nova Scotia, in response to public, media and political pressure, established a Royal Commission to find out why the justice system failed in the Marshall Case. \nThe thesis argues that Marshall's arrest, conviction and imprisonment were the result of incompetence and racial prejudice compounded by a cultural blindness of criminal justice professionals which placed Marshall in a state of dependence from which he was powerless to escape for eleven years. When Marshall eventually won his freedom, the response of the criminal justice system was to blame the victim of the miscarriage in an attempt to restore an aura of legitimacy to the system. \nFinally, the thesis argues that the work of the Royal Commission, by exposing the complex interaction of various levels of the criminal justice system and the concomitant political and social conflicts at work in the case, supports the theory that the criminal justice system operates with a degree of relative autonomy within the context of the Canadian State.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".