Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gerald Stanley's use of five peremptory challenges to exclude all visiblyIndigenous people from the jury that acquitted him of murder and manslaughter in the killing of a 22-year-old Cree man, Colten Boushie, was not the only flaw in jury selection that requires reform.This article suggests that the R v Stanley case is part of a long line of miscarriages of justice involving Indigenous people with no Indigenous representation on the jury.It argues that Bill C-75, enacted in 2019, was justified in abolishing peremptory challenges and that this reform does not violate the Charter.Unfortunately, however, Bill C-75 pursued only superficial reforms with respect to juror qualifications, and challenges for cause, and failed to provide for substantive equality challenges to panels of prospective jurors.Comprehensive jury reform is still necessary, including provincial reforms with respect to jury lists, local juries and volunteer jurors.Thought should also be given to reviving and adapting mixed juries that would require equal numbers of Indigenous people and non-Indigenous people in cases involving Indigenous people.Le recours, par Gerald Stanley, à cinq récusations péremptoires afin d'exclure toutes les personnes visiblement autochtones du jury qui l'a acquitté des accusations de meurtre et d'homicide involontaire liées au décès de Colten Boushie, un Cri de 22 ans, n'était pas le seul défaut dans le processus de sélection des jurés qui nécessite une réforme.L'auteur de cet article suggère que l'affaire R v Stanley s'insère dans une longue lignée d'erreurs judiciaires impliquant des Autochtones jugés par des jurys dont était absente toute représentation autochtone.L'auteur y fait valoir que le projet de loi C-75, promulgué en 2019, abolissait à bon droit les récusations péremptoires et que cette réforme n'enfreint pas la Charte.Malheureusement, le projet de loi C-75 ne visait que des changements superficiels concernant les qualités des jurés et les récusations motivées.Il ne permet aucune récusation fondée LA REVUE DU BARREAU CANADIEN [Vol.98 316 sur l'égalité réelle concernant les groupes de jurés potentiels.Une réforme approfondie des jurys demeure de mise, y compris à l'échelle provinciale s'agissant des listes de jurés, des jurys locaux et des jurés bénévoles.Il faudrait en outre réfléchir à remettre en vigueur et à adapter des jurys mixtes dans lesquels une parité de membres autochtones et non autochtones serait requise dans des affaires impliquant des Autochtones.
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 | 0.051 | 0.106 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.028 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".