Getting Away with Murder: the Canadian Criminal Justice System by David M. Paciocco (Toronto: Irwin Law, 1999)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Criminal Justice System:Many Canadians are losing faith in the criminaJ justice system.They believe that courts are letting too many people go and are being too soft on those who are punished.It is not too strong to suggest that some of these people are disgusted with what they see.This declining confidence in the Canadian justice system is worrisome because the stock in trade of any criminal justice system is public confidence.Without it, the system is disabled.It loses the ability to give comfort to the victims and to the public, and to maintain the respect for the law that is essential to the well-being of society.Public morale is damaged.People become dispirited, some even afraid.When the public demands that the system be made tougher, politicians respond, aJl too often making changes that undermine those basic principles that hold the system together.Declining confidence in a criminaJ justice system is dangerous for it can destroy it 4
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".