MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302289469

The trial of the Kenniff brothers: 'Australia's last bushrangers'

2002· article· en· W2302289469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anthony Jh Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueMemoirs of the Queensland Museum - Nature · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and Federalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVerdictJuryLawAppealSupreme courtEconomic JusticeConstitutionPolitical scienceHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The careers of 'Australia's last bushrangers', Patrick and James Kenniff, culminated in a showdown at Lethbridge's Pocket on Easter Sunday 1902, leaving two men dead. A massive manhunt resulted in the Kenniffs being captured near Mitchell, and their subsequent trial for wilful murder in the Queensland Supreme Court. The presiding judge, Chief Justice Sir Samuel Griffith, was one of the defining figures of Australia's history: a Premier of Queensland, a leading federationist, a major contributor to the drafting of the national Constitution, and first Chief Justice of the new nation's High Court. He also drafted the Queensland Criminal Code, under which the Kenniffs were tried, which came into effect on 1 January 1901. Yet there is a real question whether the Kenniffs received justice. They were denied a trial before a 'jury of their peers'. Their lawyer was barely competent. Significant procedural irregularities occurred. The trial judge, Griffith, also presided at their appeal, despite having announced that he agreed entirely with the jury's verdict. Applying modern legal standards, the prosecution should not have succeeded. Even by the standards of the time, justice was not seen to be done.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0170.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemoirs of the Queensland Museum - NatureSame topicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and FederalismFrench-language works237,207