Answer:
Black educated females
What do you believe are TWO important skills/qualities of a Probation Officer and Why?
The skills that I believe are two important skills/qualities of a Probation Officer include:
excellent interpersonal skills and the ability to relate to others.the ability to persuade and influence others.Who is a Probation Officer?A probation officer is a court employee who interacts with those who have been ordered to do supervised probation on a regular basis. These people frequently commit petty offenses and certain lesser-level felonies. Most people who are put on probation are first-time offenders. A method used by the court to keep people out of jail is to place them on supervised probation.
Being primarily social beings, probation officers thrive in settings where they can interact with, influence, or assist others. They also frequently exhibit entrepreneurial traits, making them fairly natural leaders who excel at influencing and persuading others.
Therefore, the skills that I believe are two important skills/qualities of a Probation Officer include excellent interpersonal skills and the ability to relate to others.
the ability to persuade and influence others.
Learn more about probation officer on:
https://brainly.com/question/14912534
#SPJ1
describe the sub field in psychology specifically forensic psychology
Forensic psychology offers troubles related to psychology and regulation. people who work in this branch observe mental standards to legal issues. this will contain analyzing criminal behavior and treatment or running at once inside the courtroom system.
Forensic psychology is every other subfield of psychology that acts as a bridge between two fields; in this situation, the technological know-how of human behavior and regulation. This area can be extraordinarily enticing to those inquisitive about crook psychology in addition to the crook justice machine, however, it's miles regularly glorified in pop culture.
Psychology consists of 4 principal regions: clinical psychology (counseling for intellectual and behavioral health), cognitive psychology (the observation of the intellectual approaches), behavioral psychology (knowledge behavior via distinctive varieties of conditioning), and biopsychology (research on the mind, behavior, and evolution).
Learn more about Forensic psychology here:
https://brainly.com/question/13762870
#SPJ9
13. Which of the following would NOT be found at an expressway entrance?
O A. Entrance ramp
O B. Acceleration lane
O C. Merge area
O D. HOV lane
which of the following evidences is an example of individual characteristics
-blue glass found at a crime scene
-irregular edges of a broken knife
-a cotton fiber found on the victim
Answer:
a cotton fiber found on the victim
If the federal and state governments have concurrent authority and the federal government decides to regulate that area exclusively, under the doctrine of federal preemption, the state law __________.
If the federal and state governments have concurrent authority and the federal government decides to regulate that area exclusively, under the doctrine of federal preemption, the state law is unconstitutional.
What is federal preemption?Due to federal preemption, federal law always prevails where two laws disagree. Constitution. In relation to the civil justice system, the concept of preemption relates to the premise that lawsuits based on state law claims of negligence or failure to warn are prohibited by federal law.
The "supreme law of the land" is defined by the Constitution as being a federal law, which indicates that if it is federal law, no other state or local law can supersede it. The same is true of how regional and national laws interact with one another. Local legislation must be superseded by state law.
To know more about federal preemption visit:- brainly.com/question/26628230
#SPJ4
Ethical Dilemmas Situation 2
You are on a grand jury deciding whether or not a police officer who shot a black man running away from him in a traffic stop be indicted and, if so under what charge. There was no weapon and the man had prior arrests an convictions for drugs but no violent offenses. How would you decide based on law? Should police officers be protected by qualified immunity?
Answer:
Is this what you asked?
Explanation:
The judge is the one who listens and analyzes the evidence presented by the prosecutor, and it is who takes the decision based on his own criteria and the evidence presented. However, if the judge thinks that the evidence is inconclusive, then the accused appears before the Grand Jury, which is made up of 23 crime-free and randomly selected citizens. So, the Judge is normally who decides whether the case should go to trial, or not, and who hears first all the evidence presented by the prosecutor.
Suppose john gets arrested in the cougareat for getting a refill on his drink, even though there are no signs that say free refills are not allowed. What aspect of the rule of law does this violate?.
It voilates publicity rule of law
The right of publicity prohibits the unpermitted commercial exploitation of a person's name, likeness, or other easily recognizable characteristics. It grants a person the only authority to provide a license for the use of their name in commercial marketing. The right to publicity is mainly protected by state common or statutory law in the United States. A right to publicity has only been formally recognized by around half of the states. In several states, the legislation against unfair competition safeguards the right to publicity. The right to publicity is supported by legal actions for misappropriation of property or for falsely representing that someone produced or endorsed a product. Check out Unfair competition.
To know more about publicity rule refer to https://brainly.com/question/11549811
#SPJ4
What is a document called that is filed with the court to state the position of the plaintiff or the defendant in a lawsuit and ask for relief from the court?.
The document is called Pleadings.
What is a Lawsuit?A lawsuit is an action brought by one or more parties in a civil court of law against another party. Only a limited number of laws from long ago that are still in force include the phrase "suit in law." The term "lawsuit" refers to a civil action in which the plaintiff asks the court for a legal or equitable remedy.
The plaintiff's complaint must get a response from the defendant. If the plaintiff wins, a judgement will be rendered in their favour, and the court may then make a number of orders, including those to uphold a right, grant damages, or impose a temporary or permanent injunction to stop or compel an action. It is possible to issue a declaratory decision to end future legal problems.
To know more about Lawsuit, visit
https://brainly.com/question/22194178
#SPJ4
Why would a state Not have
an intermediate court of
appeals?
Is there a difference in the
liklihood of an appeal.
being heard??
A state does not have an intermediate court of appeals: being heard following states do not have an intermediate appellate court: Delaware.Maine.Montana. different types of cases are dealt with differently throughout an attraction. Civil Case. either side may enchantment the verdict. crook Case. In most states, but, intermediate appellate courts were installed to relieve the workload of the country's highest courtroom with the aid of serving as the courts in which maximum litigants achieve an assessment of destructive choices from trial courts and numerous administrative corporations.
A court of appeals hears challenges to district court decisions from courts placed within its circuit, in addition to appeals from selections of federal administrative corporations. Appellate courts, additionally referred to as the court docket of appeals, are a part of the American judicial system this is accountable for hearing and reviewing appeals from legal cases that have already been heard in a tribulation-degree or other decreased court docket.
The position of the Courts of attraction isn't to offer new trials, but to check the advanced court report (courtroom files and transcripts) to decide if criminal mistakes had been made. To do this, the court docket of Appeals may additionally listen to arguments from each aspect.
Learn more about court of appeals here:
https://brainly.com/question/20302931
#SPJ9
Drivers, pedestrians, and bicycle riders must obey traffic signals except when a officer is directing traffic
What are the two main federal agencies that issue guidelines and oversee safety in the workplace?.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) oversees safety in the workplace.
What is Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)?The United States Department of Labor has a sizable regulatory organization called the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which at first had the authority to inspect and survey workplaces on behalf of the federal government. The Occupational Safety and Health Act, or OSH Act, was signed into law by President Richard M. Nixon on December 29, 1970, and it allowed Congress to create the agency. In order to "assure safe and healthy working conditions for working men and women by formulating and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, information, and assistance," OSHA's mission statement states. A number of whistleblower laws and regulations must also be enforced by the agency. Workplace safety inspections conducted by OSHA have been demonstrated to lower injury rates and injury costs without having a negative impact on employment, sales, credit standing, or company survival.
To know more about Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) visit:- https://brainly.com/question/28062841
#SPJ4
explain why income level appears to be more important than race or ethnicity when it comes to crime trends?
Answer:
People with low income levels won't be able to afford much necessities. This would lead them to depend on other unorthodox methods likes stealing which is a crime.
Explanation:
List 3 Arguments that support your viewpoint on Gun Control.
Answer:
Use these top three arguments the next time you are asked to defend the need for gun control.
01
of 03
Gun Ownership Leads to Homicides
gun control rally
Protesters with One Million Moms for Gun Control, a gun control group formed in the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut massacre, rally in New York City. Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Gun-rights advocates and other extremists sometimes behave as if every attempt to create sane and logical regulations on guns is a fruitless, fascist assault on their freedom, but a quick look at the facts shows a chilling relationship between homicides and gun ownership that shouldn't be so carelessly ignored. The more people that own guns in a region, the more firearm deaths that area will see.
According to a study on this very topic published in the American Journal of Public Health, "For each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%," (Siegel 2013). This study, which looked at data from three decades for every U.S. state, strongly suggests that the more people that own guns, the more lives will be taken by guns.02
of 03
Fewer Guns Means Fewer Gun Crimes
In the same vein, research shows that gun control restricting household firearm ownership could save lives. Gun control is therefore not only logical, it's necessary.
It's common for gun advocates to claim that the solution to gun violence is to be more heavily armed so that you can defend yourself and others against someone brandishing a weapon. This view is echoed by the popular saying, "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun."
But again, this argument contains no logic. Other countries that have implemented stricter gun ownership regulations than the U.S. have lower homicide rates, and this is no coincidence. Looking at the example that Japan, with its strict firearm control laws and its almost nonexistent national homicide rate, sets, it's clear that fewer guns, not more guns, is the obvious answer ("Japan—Gun Facts, Figures and the Law").03
of 03
You Do NOT Have the Right to Own Any Gun You Want
The Supreme Court ruled in McDonald v. Chicago (2010), a case often cited by gun-rights advocates, that private citizens may own weapons for self-defense but are subject to restrictions on those weapons. Therefore, it's not your right to build and own a nuclear or assault weapon, nor is toting a pistol in your pocket an unfettered natural right. Your right to bear arms is maintained by federal law, but it's not as loose as you might think.
Minors can't buy alcohol and we can't purchase cold medicine right off the shelf because our society aims to protect citizens from drug abuse and trafficking. In the same way, we need to regulate guns even further in order to protect Americans from gun violence. It's inaccurate to claim that unrestricted gun access and ownership is or ever was a constitutional right.
II. Does excessive force have the same meaning as deadly force? Explain.
Excessive force and deadly force do not have the same meaning as excessive force is used necessarily by the authority to control some certain situations while deadly force is used unnecessarily to harm people.
Excessive force is used necessarily when specific situations slip out of control and needs to be controlled immediately for the welfare of the common public to restore peace. On the other hand deadly force is the unnecessary use of power by the authority to impose power on common public and to harm them to justify authority. For example using violence on protestants in peaceful protest is use of deadly force.
To know more about excessive power refer to the link below
https://brainly.com/question/14960053
#SPJ9
If the federal and state governments have concurrent authority and the federal government decides to regulate that area exclusively, under the doctrine of federal preemption, the state law __________.
If the federal & state governments have concurrent authority and the federal government decides to regulate that area exclusively, under the doctrine of federal preemption, the state law is unconstitutional.
What is the doctrine of federal preemption?In the legal sphere, the Doctrine of Preemption refers to the Supremacy Clause. It states that if a federal law preempts state law, then, the state law is declared invalid. Hence, the federal court can require a state to refrain from enforcing a law if the behavior conflicts with federal law.
Because of this, If the federal & state governments have concurrent authority and the federal government decides to regulate that area exclusively, under the doctrine of federal preemption, the state law is unconstitutional.
Read more about federal preemption
brainly.com/question/25256474
#SPJ1
The 10th amendment says, the powers not delegated to the united states by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. This means that ________.
This means that the relationship between the state and federal governments is defined by the 10th Amendment, which also contributes to this definition.
The challenge of balancing state and federal interests as they relate to the federal government's authority to tax, police, and regulate matters like wage and hour laws, the release of private details in records management systems, and laws pertaining to strip mining has gotten worse as federal action has increased.
On December 15, 1791, the United States ratified the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which is a component of the Bill of Rights. By declaring that the federal government only has the powers granted to it by the Constitution and that any other powers not denied to the state by the Constitution are assigned to each state, it embodies the notion of federalism, commonly known as states' rights. During its first session after the Constitution's adoption in 1789, the first Congress of the United States put up the amendment.
Learn more about 10th Amendment here:
https://brainly.com/question/2136209
#SPJ4
Answer:
It is D - states can make their own laws, as long as the laws don't violate the Constitution
Explanation:
Just did flocab quiz
In rem jurisdiction is created when a court uses its quasi in rem jurisdiction to attach a litigant’s property and compel that litigant to appear in court.
The given statement "In rem jurisdiction is created when a court uses its quasi in rem jurisdiction to attach a litigant’s property and compel that litigant to appear in court". Is False.
With "in rem jurisdiction," a court has the ability to decide who owns an item or piece of real estate. When plausible claimants cannot be identified, it is usually the prime suspect.
Quasi in rem When a court has in Rem jurisdiction over property, it may "compel" a party to court by seizing the property in question and using it to secure the party's appearance. This is how the court might "get around" the fact that it lacks personal jurisdiction over one of the parties by exercising its jurisdiction over the property at issue. Although the court cannot directly require the plaintiff's presence, it may indirectly do so by threatening the litigant with the loss of property if the litigant fails to appear in court.
Learn more about In rem jurisdiction and Quasi in rem jurisdiction-
https://brainly.com/question/14766098
Federal rules of evidence that determine what evidence is accepted in court were enacted in.
Federal rules of evidence that determine what evidence is accepted in court were enacted on Nov. 20, 1972.
What are Federal Laws?The body of legislation developed by a nation's federal government is known as federal law. When many political entities, such as states or provinces, unite to establish a federation, they cede most of their individual sovereignty and authority to the federal government while keeping or reserving other, more restricted, authorities. As a result, there are two or more tiers of governance inside a defined geographical area. Federal law is the body of law governing the shared central government.
Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Republic of India, Russia, the former Soviet Union, and the United States are just a few examples of countries with federal governments.
To know more about Federal Laws, visit:
https://brainly.com/question/28498485
#SPJ4
The readings this week speak to a call within each of us to seek meaning and truth. What are some of the challenges we see in the world in respect to knowing what is true? What can impede us from living lives that align with what we believe to be true? How would our readings address these challenges to knowing and living what we know to be true? The module shared a song about belief and challenges. Do you have a song, book, etc. that helps you remain faithful to your beliefs?
The module readings spoke of idols and things we put in the place of our authentic call to seek and live the truth. Most people don't worship a golden calf literally, but what would you say are some of the "idols" in our current culture? How might we struggle against idolatry in our current age? What insights do the module readings offer in terms of idols and how we can avoid this temptation?
The readings this week speak of the dialogue and reasonability of faith and the relationship between reason and faith. What are some examples of things we believe without questioning, even though there might not be physical evidence? How do our readings define faith and the relationship between faith and reason? What challenges are there in our current culture to faith and how might our readings address these challenges?
We can actually deduce here that some of the challenges we see in the world in respect to knowing what is true are:
Consistent peddling of falsehood through the media.Indoctrination of false informationScarcity of truth carriers.Suppression of the freedom of speech.We see that the things that can impede us from living lives that align with what we believe to be true are:
Fear of acting on what we believe to be true.Wrong mindsetLack of inner motivation for what we believe.The wrong environment.What are challenges?In life, challenges are seen as certain setbacks that people experience which they must overcome if they must make progress in life. Challenges come either to make someone or to mar the person.
Our attitudes towards challenges determine if we are going to overcome or not.
To knowing and living what we know to be true, we must address the stated challenges by:
Renewing our mindset - A change of mindset.Changing our environment.Dealing with every form of fearAssociating with the right company.Learn more about challenges on https://brainly.com/question/27329666
#SPJ1
why do you think that having freedom to buy what you want in the market place is more effective than having a centrally planned economy
The free market brings freedom to the customers because, in a Flea market, the customers can purchase the goods and services from whichever producer they want.
The definition of a customer is a person who buys products or services from a shop, restaurant or different retail vendor. An example of a consumer is a person who goes to an electronics keep and buys a television. (informal) someone, in particular one conducting some sort of interaction with others.
A customer is any individual or company who may have a hobby in buying or has offered, services or products from a company. On every occasion, you pay an invoice or buy something from a shop you're acting as their purchaser. As well-known, there are 3 primary forms of customers.
Learn more about customer
here https://brainly.com/question/380037
#SPJ9
When a plaintiff in a strict liability lawsuit has used a product in a way that is not intended or that the defendant could not have reasonably foreseen, the defendant may assert which defense?.
Strict liability is the defense you may assert.
In terms of products responsibility, irrespective of the defendant's intention, a defendant is liable if the plaintiff can demonstrate that the product is faulty.
Regardless of the steps taken to avoid harm, a defendant who participated in an unusually risky sport will be held held responsible any evidence of negligence—for any personal injuries and damages to property brought on by the action.
To succeed in an absolute liability action, you must first sustain harm. Second, you need to demonstrate that the harm was brought on by the defendant's goods or behavior. You can sue for your losses without having to prove fault as long as their actions caused your damages and the situation falls within strict liability laws.
To know more about liability lawsuit, visit the link:
https://brainly.com/question/28173731
#SPJ4
Which amendment separated the vote for president and vice president in the electoral college?.
The twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution separated the vote for president and vice president in the electoral college.
What is the twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution?The process for choosing the president and vice president is outlined in the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution (often known as Amendment XII). It replaced the method by which the Electoral College was initially operated, as specified in Article II, Section 1, Clause 3. On December 9, 1803, Congress introduced the amendment, and on June 15, 1804, the required three-fourths of state legislatures ratified it. All subsequent presidential elections have been conducted in accordance with the revised regulations, which became effective for the 1804 election.
There was no distinction between votes cast for president and vice president under the original terms of the Constitution, which required each member of the Electoral College to cast two votes.
To know more about the twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution visit:- https://brainly.com/question/730274
#SPJ4
What is one possible repercussion that parents not paying legally-required child support may encounter?
Answer:
due to it being a criminal offense the parent could be charged with a misdemeanor or felony. the parent could be fined round 5000$ or sent to jail up to four years. but it also depends on the state you live in some may be not to bad or worse
Explanation:
speaking from experience lol.
Answer: fines and jail or back childsupport
Explanation:
explain why income level appears to be more important than race or ethnicity when it comes to crime trends?
D. Different Governments. Imagine you are in charge of creating a government for a brand new
country! Which system would you choose if...
A.Federal
B. Confederal
C. Unitary
VICS
1. You want the central government to have the most power?
2. You want laws to be the same throughout the country?
3. You want the central government to have the least power?
4. You want individual states to keep as much independence as
possible?
5. You want both national laws and state laws to exist?
6. You don't care whether individual states have any power?
7. You want a balance between power in the states and the
central government?
8. You want there to be few, if any, national laws?
The Federal System I Select
Which nation's government is a confederation?There are no confederate nations today, although there have been in the past. Examples include Switzerland (1291–1848), the union of Sweden and Norway (1814–1905), and Senegambia (1982-89).
What distinguishes the unitary and federal confederate systems of government?A federal system shares authority between the federal government and the state governments. In a confederation, the vast majority of authority is held by the states, as opposed to a unitary system, when all power is held by the national government.
To Know more about Federal System
https://brainly.com/question/13038482
#SPJ9
Select the elements that do not represent corpus delicti and click submit.
The elements that do not represent corpus delicti are:
causationconcurrenceWhat is corpus delicti?This refers to the legal term that has to do with the facts and circumstances that make up a crime.
Hence, we can see that The elements that do not represent corpus delicti are:
causationconcurrenceThis is because causation and concurrence are not valid proof that a crime was committed and guilt being established and thus is not a representation of corpus delicti.
In criminal law, the facts and circumstances are determined by several factors...
Read more about corpus delicti here:
https://brainly.com/question/17636247
#SPJ1
A request for admission can lengthen a trial because the parties have to take the time to prove facts on which they may already agree. True or false?.
Answer:
Explanation:
true
What is a document called that is filed with the court to state the position of the plaintiff or the defendant in a lawsuit and ask for relief from the court?.
the Pleading document is filed with the court to state the position of the plaintiff or the defendant in a lawsuit and ask for relief from the court.
What is a pleading document?Pleadings are indeed the authorized legal contracts that plaintiffs must submit to the court in order to begin a case. Frequent aspects of pleadings include assertions of claim and defense. These kinds of documents include specifics regarding your unique claim or defense and the proof backing it. The pleadings should identify the key issues in the case for the court and the other parties. This article explains the function of pleadings and the information they include. The pleadings contain all significant factual accusations that the parties will have to substantiate at trial. Keep in mind that the opposing party's pleadings must contain any truth or information that might surprise the other party or undermine that party's case.
To know more about the pleading document visit:- brainly.com/question/20814132
#SPJ4
Daphne contracts with speedy builders inc. To construct a six-foot fence around her yard. Daphne’s neighbor rando is delighted because daphne’s fence will border the north side of his property. This means he can enclose the rest of his property for a much lower price. Before construction begins, however, speedy builders receives an offer for another, more lucrative project, and refuses to perform the contract with daphne. Who can sue speedy builders for breach of contract?.
According to law Daphne has the power to sue Speedy Builders for breach of contract.
A legal claim and category of civil wrong known as "breach of contract" refers to when a number of the parties to a contract refuse to perform their obligations under the terms of the agreement or interfere with the performance of the other party. A party commits a breach when it disobeys one or more of its obligations under a contract, whether completely or partially. It may also convey its intent to breach the agreement or otherwise show that it is unable to fulfill its obligations. When a contract is broken, the party who broke the agreement is responsible for paying the injured party's damages
Learn more about breach of contract here:
brainly.com/question/28101555
#SPJ4
Alice is texting while driving and hits barney with her vehicle as he is crossing the road. If barney sues alice for negligence in a trial court, barney would be the defendant. True or false?.
Answer:
False, Alice would be the defendant
Explanation:
Alice is the one getting sued, therefore she is the defendant
