Osgoode Workshop examines Self-Defence and Use of Force
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osgoode Workshop examines Self-Defence and Use of Force\nTORONTO, February 26, 2014 – Recent changes to the Criminal Code and the common law have sought to clarify the law on self-defence and various other related justification and excuses. The law in this area continues to evolve as it is applied not only to bar-room brawlers but to ordinary citizens, parents, hockey players, abused spouses and, increasingly, police officers.\nOsgoode Professional Development will bring together experts from diverse sectors of the criminal justice system on Saturday, March 1, 2014 from 9 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. at Osgoode Professional Development Centre, 1 Dundas St. W., 26th floor, in Toronto to discuss, debate and give practical tips on the latest “need to know” developments, including:\n• What is the current state of the s.25 Criminal Code defence of Protection of Persons Acting under Authority?\n• Understanding the interaction of the criminal justice process and police act discipline systems\n• Consent and capacity issues in sex assault cases\n• New Citizen’s Arrest Criminal Code provisions and how they work in practice\n• Applying the new self-defence provisions and SCC decision in R. v. Ryan in domestic abuse cases\n• Avoiding potential landmines in applying the “air of reality” test post recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions\n• What is left of the traditional defences in R. v. Jobidon and Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Attorney General in Right of Canada?\nKeynote speaker will be Ian D. Scott, former Director, Ontario Special Investigations Unit. Program chairs are Danielle Robitaille, Partner, Henein Hutchison LLP and Suhail Akhtar, Crown Counsel, Ministry of the Attorney General (Ontario).\nWHAT: Self-Defence and Use of Force: The New and Evolving Substantive Defences to Violent Conduct presented by Osgoode Professional Development\nWHEN: Saturday, March 1, 2014 from 9 a.m.to 4.30 p.m.\nWHERE: Osgoode Professional Development Centre, 1 Dundas St. W., 26th floor, Toronto\n-30-\nYork University is helping to shape the global thinkers and thinking that will define tomorrow. York U’s unwavering commitment to excellence reflects a rich diversity of perspectives and a strong sense of social responsibility that sets us apart. A York U degree empowers graduates to thrive in the world and achieve their life goals through a rigorous academic foundation balanced by real-world experiential education. As a globally recognized research centre, York U is fully engaged in the critical discussions that lead to innovative solutions to the most pressing local and global social challenges. York U’s 11 faculties and 27 research centres are thinking bigger, broader and more globally, partnering with 288 leading universities worldwide. York U's community is strong − 55,000 students, 7,000 faculty and staff, and more than 250,000 alumni. Media Contact: Virginia Corner, Communications Manager, Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, 416-736-5820, vcorner@osgoode.yorku.ca
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.006 |
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".