Unpacking Risk? Section 810 Peace Bonds in Prince Albert
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Section 810 peace bonds have come to supplant other forms of community supervision (i.e. parole) for high-risk offenders in Canada. Although peace bonds are central to the lived experience of offenders in Canada; very few studies have taken them up within the literature. Based on a review of the literature, peace bonds function towards multiple and conflicting ends. Specifically, they are held to simultaneously facilitate the reintegration of the subject and manage the risk they pose to the community and its residents. Within this study, the assumptions of the literature and community concerns are tested against local policing data, demonstrating where risk, reintegration, and harm find expression in the work of police officers. \n\nThis study examines 10 years of police records related to the administration and enforcement of peace bonds in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. The city of Prince Albert is a small western prairie city with a large Indigenous population. Data was collected through access to information requests to the local police service and contains officer notes related to the enforcement and surveillance of peace bonds and documents used in the court process. A discourse analysis of these documents was conducted through institutional ethnography to better understand how these texts enter into the work of local officers. Specifically, this project asks: i) how do rules and policy shape officer work related to peace bonds? ii) what values are embedded within these policies and how do they shape the work of officers? and iii) how do these values shape the officer/subject dynamic around risk management, reintegration, and harm? \n\nThis project demonstrates the emphasis on risk management within peace bond police, resulting in conditional breaches and many returns to corrections. Further, the risk-centred nature of the current peace bond process serves to reduce focus on reintegration and the mitigation of harm. In the 10 years of data (2009-2019), only one (n=12) offender was able to work their way off of their bond and “graduate” from their conditions. Ultimately, this study demonstrates the need for further research that directly draws on the lived experience of police officers and peace bond subjects.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".