Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual violence is a rampant issue that affects millions of individuals around the world and especially women. This thesis will explore the work that the presumption of innocence, Section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, does in the sexual assault trial in Canada. By discussing the juridogenic nature of Section 11(d) from an anti-carceral feminist perspective, and combined methods approach, I will demonstrate the both essential and vexatious nature of the presumption of innocence. Due-process procedures render a complainant untruthful by the natural effect of rendering an accused person honest, therefore, I argue that Section 11(d) creates and codifies a presumption of non-credibility on complainants. This reflects epistemic injustice and is especially problematic for survivors, because the issue becomes compounded by rape myths and testimonial injustice. The thesis engages in broader arguments around the call for justice beyond judicial convictions and community commitment to change.
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 | 0.058 | 0.198 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".