Police Sexual Violence as Psychological Detention: Making Full Use of <i>Charter</i> Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper argues that individual responsibility has been overemphasized in cases of sexual violence by police. The fact that police officers are part of a state system calls for an examination of the role of the state in contributing to the risks of sexual violence by police. The paper thus contends that Canadian law requires methods to address state blame in such cases. It analyses psychological detention under section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a means to draw a connection between police powers, sexual violence, and state blame. The suggested section 9 interpretation builds on recent decisions like R v Le and R v Lafrance, which have expanded considerations of identity and social contexts. However, this paper points out that decisions in detention cases have mostly emphasized race and socio-economic factors and have set gender aside. To adapt section 9 to cases of police sexual violence, this paper recommends further incorporating three elements into the detention analysis: (1) gender, (2) intersectionality, and (3) the frequent and gendered nature of sexual violence in Canadian society. These three factors stem from academic commentaries and decisions ruling on police sexual violence, which identified commonalities in victims’ identities and experiences. Cet article affirme que la responsabilité individuelle a été exagérément mise en avant dans les cas de violences sexuelles commises par ldes membres des services policiers. Puisque les policier.ère.s font partie du système étatique, il est impératif de s’attarder au rôle joué par l’État dans la création de risques de violence sexuelle par la police. L’article soutient donc que le droit canadien doit faire appel à de nouvelles méthodes pour traiter la question de la responsabilité de l’État dans de tels cas. Il analyse la détention psychologique en vertu de l’article 9 de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertésafin d’établir un lien entre les pouvoirs de la police, la violence sexuelle et la responsabilité de l’État. L’interprétation proposée de l’article 9 s’appuie sur des décisions récentes telles que R. c. Le et R. c. Lafrance, qui ont élargi la prise en compte de l’identité et des contextes sociaux. Cependant, ce texte souligne que les décisions rendues dans les affaires de détention ont surtout mis l’accent sur la race et les facteurs socio-économiques et ont laissé de côté le genre. Pour adapter l’article 9 aux cas de violence sexuelle policière, le présent document recommande d’intégrer davantage trois éléments dans l’analyse de la détention : (1) le genre, (2) l’intersectionnalité et (3) la nature fréquente et genrée de la violence sexuelle dans la société canadienne. Ces trois facteurs proviennent de l’analyse de commentaires académiques et des décisions rendues en matière de violence sexuelle policière, qui ont identifié des points communs dans les identités et les expériences des victimes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".