Review of: Remington, R. & Zickefoose, S. (2009). How Forbidden Love Drove a 12-Year-Old to Murder Her Family: Runaway Devil. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
book, "Runaway Devil," is a bone chilling piece of literature that uses a journalistic approach to identify the odious truth behind a young girl and her older boyfriend's motives for murdering her family in a "quiet suburban street in Medicine Hat, Alberta" (p.xi).Using interviews, court hearings, blog posts, social media sites, and internet instant messages, the authors tell the story of a teenage rebel who experiences the troubling world of being an adolescent.While she grows up in a supportive and loving environment, she turns towards heavy-metal music and goth culture as a way to express her true emotions.Remington and Zickefoose look to analyze and break down the reasons as to how a 12-year-old girl was able to manipulate a 23-year-old man into committing a heinous crime against her parents and brother.The book focuses on the detailed and organized timeline, starting from when the murders were committed to the final verdict hand given to the murderous couple.Remington and Zickefoose go into depth to explore how J.R.'s family life may have influenced her to participate in this inexplicable crime.Neighbours describe Marc and Debra's family as "always [treating] each other with respect, they treated their children with the same respect and love" (p.16).When the family moved to the quiet town of Medicine Hat, J.R. was perceived by her peers as a kind, gentle, and understanding individual who still had her preteen innocence.But when J.R. reached the beginning of her early adolescence she went through a drastic change.She became involved with the local goth crowd that got together at the Medicine
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".