BC Studies, no. 92, Anthropology and History of the Courts, Autumn, 1992, pp. 55-65
Description
Contends that the Delgamuukw decision employed a type of argumentation in which over simplification of language and common sense resulted in a decision based on faulty grounds and inadequate versions of history.
Compares testimonies of Drs. Sheila Robinson and Wayne Suttles in the Heiltsuk herring roe fisheries case attempting to show how scholarship can manipulate histories.