MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401019200 · doi:10.29173/alr2781

Transforming Canadian Criminal Justice: A Review of Indictment: The Criminal Justice System on Trial, Benjamin Perrin (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2023)

2024· review· en· W4401019200 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Sandrine Ampleman-Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndictmentCriminal justiceEconomic JusticeCriminologyLawPolitical scienceCriminal trialSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The injustices within the criminal justice system have led to countless publications.Scholars have filled libraries and spilled much ink to express dissatisfaction with criminal law.They will probably persist in doing so, as the criminal justice system is an institution that continues to structure our society.People like me might never face the criminal justice system.As a legal scholar, I analyze it, I teach it, and I criticize it, but I have not experienced it to its full depth.Therefore, the words of Benjamin Perrin, author of Indictment: The Criminal Justice System on Trial, struck a chord. 1 Like him, I have never had a negative experience with the police, and yet I have studied police violence for several years.Like him, I desperately need to shift my gaze away from academic discussions that too often exclude narratives of people in direct contact with the justice system.Perrin's book -based on personal accounts and scholarly analyses -follows the example of seminal works like Putting Trials on Trial, and will surely become a significant contribution to the socio-legal literature in Canada. 2 I. THE PROMISEThe first chapter sets the tone of the book.Perrin explains how the words of Harold Johnson -who is obviously a strong influence -resonated with him.Johnson called for the need to engage meaningfully with Indigenous peoples when discussing Indigenous matters.Put simply, people who are impacted by a decision should always take part in the decision-making process.Similarly, when discussing any issue, we should ensure that the people concerned have a seat at the table.Perrin bases his work on this famous "nothing on us without us" principle.3 He investigates the criminal justice system through the eyes of people who have experienced it: a breath of fresh air in legal scholarship.The book is dotted with excerpts from discussions with legal experts, victims, criminologists, offenders, and more.This first chapter leaves you wanting more.It promises a book analyzing the criminal justice system from a human perspective and uncovering all dark sides of criminal justice -not just the dark sides relevant to legal scholars. II. THE AMBITIONAs the title of the manuscript alludes, the first part of the book contains several indictments.It condemns the criminal justice system and points to many issues or legal responses that have caused or exacerbated traumas.For Perrin, traumas are both the roots of 1

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0130.023
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207