Question 1
5 pts
The Rules of Evidence apply to
A)Criminal law cases only
B)Civil law cases only
C)Both civil and criminal law cases
Answer: A
Explanation:
Answer:
A.
Explanation:
thats just the answer
Which ancient leader was the first to appoint judges to help keep order?
Answer:
Hammurabi
Explanation:
Maybe because if his long reign
Answer:
The answer is Hammurabi
Explanation:
I got it right on edge assignment
HURRY !!! 100 points!!
Which of the following is NOT a possible verdict following jury deliberations?
A. guilty
B. not guilty
C. delayed decision
D. hung jury
А
B
C
Answer:
the correct answer is D mate.
Explanation:
hope it helped :)
Among the following is NOT a possible verdict following jury deliberations is a hung jury. Thus the correct option is D.
What are jury deliberations?The jury enters the courtroom after receiving the directions and makes a decision on the case there before delivering its decision. Depending on all the case discussions, this might result in a guilty or not guilty verdict.
Lengthy discussions by a jury usually indicate that there is some debate regarding the alleged victim's guilt or innocence which indicates that the result may be positive.
After a detailed examination but still certain to reach a result, a jury is said to have "hung" in court. A "hung jury" is a jury that could not reach a majority verdict on guilt or innocence because there were insufficient votes in either direction.
Therefore, option D is appropriate.
Learn more about jury deliberations, here:
https://brainly.com/question/10208788
#SPJ2
100 POINTS!!
Which amendment protects citizens from having their private property taken by the government?
the Fourth Amendent
the Third Amendment
the First Amendment
the Second Amendment
Answer:
fourth ammendment protects citizens from that
The amendment that protects citizens from having their private property taken by the government is the Fourth Amendment. Thus, option (a) is correct.
The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which is a component of the Bill of Rights, forbids arbitrary searches and seizures. It establishes standards for the issuance of warrants, which must be authorized by a judge or magistrate, supported by oath or affirmation, and supported by probable cause.
The Fourth Amendment safeguards citizens against illegal government searches and seizures, but only those that fall under the legal definition of being unreasonable are covered.
Learn more about on amendment, here:
https://brainly.com/question/13276616
#SPJ2
Owen loves his job. He primarily works out of his home office, but frequently travels to other areas to do an investigation. He is skilled at interviewing people and piecing together information to explain a situation. In which career pathway does Owen most likely work?
Answer:
B
Explanation:
A national security expert or adviser refers to an individual who is saddled with the responsibility of gathering intelligence, security updates and informations in order to strengthen or fortify the security architecture of a country.
Basically, a national security expert or adviser should be very skilled at interviewing people at various locations to enable him or her gather strategic data (informations) and piecing together these informations to explain a situation.
In this scenario, Owen primarily works out of his home office, but frequently travels to other areas to do an investigation. Therefore, the career pathway that Owen most likely works in is National Security.
E=mc cubed, true or false?
Answer: false
Explanation:
Answer:
FALSE
Explanation:
I think but I'm not sure
Suzy loaded her .38 caliber pistol, snuck out the back door, and, unknown to Bob, with finger on the trigger aimed directly at his heart. She fired but the gun only made a loud noise. Unknown to Suzy, she had loaded the gun with blanks, thinking they were real bullet.
Answer:
Suzy is expected to be charged with attempted murder.
Explanation:
Suzy showed a strong intention to kill her husband, even though her plan failed and she was unable to actually kill her. For this reason, she should be charged with attempted murder and since there is direct evidence that she wanted to kill Bob, it is likely that she would be convicted, even without actually carrying out the crime.
This accusation would be prevalent, even if Suzi had not caused Bob any injuries or injuries.