Restorative Justice as a Resolution for the Crime of Rape with Child Perpetrators
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A child who commits a criminal act can be called a child in conflict with the law. One of the crimes committed by children was rape, which involved elementary and junior high school children in Probolinggo; they reportedly raped a high school student until they became pregnant. Sexual crimes against children occur in Southeast Asian countries, such as the Philippines, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The purpose of this study was to review restorative justice as an effort to resolve the criminal act of rape with child perpetrators. The research method used is normative juridical research, with the approach of laws and concepts and collecting primary legal material in the form of existing cases. This study found that the restorative justice process in juvenile crime is essential because there are essential things to focus on the regulation that requires the active role of the community, perpetrators, and victims of crime, including the affected community, in the restorative justice process. A fundamental balancing approach must also be taken, namely, first, imposing sanctions based on responsibility for recovering victims' losses as a consequence of criminal acts; second, rehabilitation and reintegration of actors; and third, strengthening community safety and security systems.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it