Why Indigenous Canadians on reserves are reluctant to complain about the police
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent widespread protests and intensive media coverage of actual and alleged acts of police misconduct against members of vulnerable populations (e.g., Indigenous and racialized persons, mentally ill and/or addicted persons) overrepresented in the criminal justice system have renewed interest internationally in the factors influencing civilian complaints against police. In Canada, a major concern exists regarding how Indigenous persons who feel improperly treated by the police perceive and confront barriers to making formal complaints about such treatment. This study focuses on the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), the police agency providing services to the majority of rural and northern reserve communities. Our survey and interviews with influential “community informants” (in this instance community court workers) with intimate knowledge of such local communities, shared culture and language, and vicarious appreciation of the experiences of community members support the view that Indigenous persons do encounter significant barriers to launching formal complaints and are consistent with other research literature. We discuss our findings, raise policy considerations for decision makers such as police leaders and police complaints bodies, and outline implications for future research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".