MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388286645 · doi:10.1162/jinh_r_01994

<i>Reckoning with Racism: Police, Judges and the RDS Case</i> by Constance Backhouse

2023· article· en· W4388286645 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Devlin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Interdisciplinary History · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOfficerLawAppealSupreme courtWhite (mutation)AcquittalCriminologyPolitical scienceNewspaperExclusionary ruleSociologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Backhouse has crafted an outstanding book that is, on one level, a micro-analysis of how one run-of-the-mill interaction between a youth and a police officer metamorphosized into one of the most significant legal cases in Canadian history. On another level, it is a macro-analysis of how the Canadian legal system and Canadian society in general is saturated by, and at the same time struggles with, anti-Black racism.On October 17, 1993, Rodney Darren Small, a fifteen-year-old Black youth, found himself in an altercation with a white police officer in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Subsequently, the prosecutor brought three charges against Small. During the trial, youth court Judge Corrine Sparks, the first Black female judge appointed in Canada, acquitted the youth, noting in part that “sometimes white police officers overreact.” This led to a successful appeal by the Crown on the basis of actual bias by the judge against the police officer. In the ensuing three years, a series of additional appeals culminated in a deeply divided and somewhat confusing Supreme Court of Canada decision that upheld Small’s acquittal and affirmed Judge Sparks’ decision.In both style and substance, the book is a page turner, crisply written and driven by a sense of anticipation as to what might happen next. In addition to many of the tools used by legal historians (archives, newspapers, online sources, legal texts—legal decisions, facta (briefs submitted to the court by the lawyers before a hearing), oral arguments—obituaries, and so on), the richness and nuance of the analysis derives from two main sources. The first are Backhouse’s ninety-nine interviews with a vast array of people—the accused, some of the lawyers, some of the judges, community activists, academics—which is a remarkable feat of research. The second is the author’s adoption of an intersectional analysis guided by critical race theory, feminist theory, and, on occasion, critical disability theory. In deploying these tools, Backhouse provides fundamental insights into the individuals, institutions, ideas, ideals, ideologies, and identities that both constituted and reverberate from the RDS case.The book touches on two further points of interest beyond the specifics of the RDS case. First, Backhouse confronts head-on the issue of the legitimacy of a white person engaging in research on what is the leading case addressing anti-Black racism in Canada. Acknowledging the dangers of such a project, Backhouse diligently incorporates as many Black voices in their own words as possible. Recognizing that this is still a partial and racially situated interpretation, Backhouse uses the book to communicate such perspectives as best as she is able within the confines of the project. Second, in the conclusion, although careful not to claim that history can predict the future, Backhouse identifies a plethora of unanswered questions about racism in the Canadian legal system that are highlighted by the RDS case. Some of these questions are specific to the case and identify potential limitations in Backhouse’s own interpretation. But many are structural and systemic in nature, thereby demanding ongoing attention and action not only by scholars, but by all members of the justice system, indeed all Canadians. While there can be no gainsaying that RDS was a significant victory for Black Canadians, the extent and ramifications of that victory are very much unresolved almost a quarter of a century later.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0270.016
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0070.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Interdisciplinary HistorySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207