hua is arrested at a warehouse in industry park and is charged with the crime of theft. hua will be prosecuted by

Answer:

the detective is the anwer

Explanation:

because thats the job of detective

For the defendant to be obligated in a carelessness case, it should be demonstrated that the respondent's direct caused the injury. this is alluded to as the factual cause. option (A) is correct.

A defendant might be seen as obligated to an offended party for perpetrating a misdeed on the off chance that the activity was (a) purposeful, as on account of wrongdoing; or (b) inadvertent yet careless because the respondent didn't satisfy his obligation of care to the offended party.

In strict liability cases, the respondent is consequently liable for the harm brought about by the litigant. The offended parties don't have to demonstrate that the respondent's careless or crazy conduct caused their wounds. All things considered, they need just demonstrate that a particular occasion ended up recovering damages. Therefore,  option (A) is correct.

Learn more about defendant:

https://brainly.com/question/26831854

#SPJ4

This question is not complete, Here I am attaching the complete question:

For the defendant to be liable in a negligence case, it must be proven that the defendant's conduct actually caused the injury. This is referred to as

a. factual cause.

b. duty of due care.

c. proximate cause.

d. breach.

One of the arguments that the city government could give in support of the action or levy and collecting taxes is that small business owner are beneficiaries of public infrastructure that are installed and maintained using public funds. Hence, it is only just and equitable for them to contribute to the repair and maintenance of such facilities.

The argument that privacy advocates may give against such taxes is that they already pay Company Income Tax to the IRS. Hence this is a duplication of tax.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS)  is the revenue service for the federal government of the United States, responsible for collecting federal taxes and enforcing the Internal Revenue Code, the major body of federal statutory tax legislation.

The Internal Revenue Service is the nation's tax-collecting agency, and it is responsible for enforcing the Internal Revenue Code, which was adopted by Congress.

Learn more about taxes:
https://brainly.com/question/25783927
#SPJ1

In the planning function, public management's main focus is on executing the assigned tasks. - False

When organizational management is in the planning phase, this is when it defines its aims, goals, and action plans to accomplish them. One of a firm's most crucial steps is strategic planning because it addresses the organisation's long-term needs. It must be well-structured, contain the organisation's mission, vision, and values, and aid in the achievement of the firm's goals and objectives.

Setting goals, objectives, and priorities as well as creating strategies and action plans to accomplish them are the primary areas of emphasis for public management when performing the planning function. Despite being a crucial component of the implementation stage, carrying out given duties is not the primary concern of the planning function.

Complete Question:

In the planning function, public management's main focus is on executing the assigned tasks. True/False

Read more about planning function on:

https://brainly.com/question/3504046

#SPJ4

The statement that "in the event of a conflict between HIPAA and state law, state law preempts HIPAA unless HIPAA is stricter" is true. However, let us have an in-depth explanation.In the United States, HIPAA and state law regulate the use and disclosure of protected health information (PHI).

The privacy regulations apply to most covered entities, which include health plans, healthcare clearinghouses, and healthcare providers. However, in certain cases, state law requirements can conflict with HIPAA's requirements.If HIPAA regulations and state law requirements conflict, the requirements of the stricter law will apply.

This indicates that the federal law does not pre-empt the state law when it comes to healthcare privacy laws unless the federal law, HIPAA, has stricter provisions than the state law in question. In other words, if a state law is stricter than HIPAA's regulations, the state law will take precedence and must be followed by healthcare providers.

To know more about PHI visit:

https://brainly.com/question/31930738

#SPJ11

Answer: You should frame the homeless man, It may not be pretty and it may result in the death of one, but the deaths of many will have been avoided. Its mainly a greater good type of thing.

Explanation:

when she home all alone all she do is twerk

Answer:

1) According to the cartoon, the negative consequences of increasing the minimum wage are that it can lead to inflation and cause businesses to cut costs by laying off workers or reducing the quality of their products.

2) Branco's political ideology is conservative, and his ideology opposes government intervention in the economy. This means that he believes that businesses should be free to operate without excessive regulation, including minimum wage laws. In the cartoon, Branco is using his artistic talents to promote his conservative views by criticizing the idea of raising the minimum wage and suggesting that it will lead to negative consequences for workers and businesses.

Answer:

b False

Explanation:

Answer:

Evidence-based policing is the performance of an action by a police department in such a way that the execution is based on the best available information about efficiency and effectiveness.

This theory establishes that the development of the different measures of force to be taken by the different police organizations must be decided according to scientific and epistemological criteria generated through different previous experiences, be they demographic analyzes, statistical values, or any other evidence that allows to accredit the best and most effective action to take for a given case.

Answer:

Utilitarianism.

Explanation:

Utilitarianism is a term or philosophy of ethics that describes the belief or view that, an action is considered morally right if it resulted in goodness, more pleasure, or happiness than bad, pain, or unhappiness.

Hence, in this case, Finley believes, stealing in itself is neither bad nor good; what renders it bad or good is the effects it generates. Thus, stealing from a greedy CEO, whom he believes has less need for the money, and gives the money to a large number of people whom he thinks to need money can be justified based on the calculation that the benefits of the theft outweigh the losses caused by the theft.

Therefore, the right answer is UTILITARIANISM

Answer:

Never give up on the grind

Labor unions have a long history that dates to the late 1700s. Workers were rarely able to improve their pay or working conditions without strong leadership. But as capable leaders started to appear, labor grew into a force that pressed for acceptance by industry and the government. The labor movement underwent gradual change, but thanks to the efforts of some progressive union leaders, significant progress was eventually made.

Thus this is the evolution of the legal status of American Unions.

To learn more about American Unions, refer: https://brainly.com/question/2025366

#SPJ9

Labor unions have a long history that dates to the late 1700s. Workers were rarely able to improve their pay or working conditions without strong leadership. But as capable leaders started to appear, labor grew into a force that pressed for acceptance by industry and the government. The labor movement underwent a gradual change, but thanks to the efforts of some progressive union leaders, significant progress was eventually made.

Early organized labor was frequently suppressed by legislation and judicial rulings and received no support from the government. According to the "conspiracy doctrine" of the late 1700s, the majority of collective activities are unlawful because they go against the interests of the general public.

In the early 1800s, organized trade and industry labor had little success in securing better pay and working conditions, as noted by Fossum (2012), but courts continued to obstruct the majority of collective endeavors.

Thus this is the evolution of the legal status of American Unions.

To learn more about American Unions, refer: brainly.com/question/2025366

#SPJ9

The tenth U.S. Constitutional amendment gives state governments plenary power.

What is plenary power?

According to US constitutional law, plenary power is one that has been granted to an entity or individual in full, without being subject to scrutiny or restrictions on how it may be used. When a plenary authority is given to one body, all other bodies lose their ability to use it if they are not otherwise entitled. Judicial review of plenary powers is not permitted, either in a specific situation or generally.

Due to the nature of the Constitution, which assigns distinct but occasionally overlapping functions to the three parts of the federal government and the states, there are very few glaring examples of such powers in the United States.

To learn more about plenary power visit;

https://brainly.com/question/30653314

#SPJ4

If war crimes are committed during a civil war, they are considered war crimes rather than civil war crimes.

War crimes refer to violations of international humanitarian law committed during armed conflicts. These crimes include acts such as torture, genocide, and indiscriminate attacks on civilians. The classification of war crimes is based on the nature of the acts committed and the context of the conflict, rather than the specific type of war.

Civil wars, on the other hand, are internal conflicts between different groups within a country. While civil wars can be the backdrop for war crimes, the crimes themselves are still considered war crimes under international law. The distinction lies in the fact that the crimes are committed during a war, regardless of whether it is an international or civil conflict.

Therefore, if war crimes are committed during a civil war, they are classified as war crimes rather than civil war crimes. The designation of a war crime is determined by the nature of the acts and their violation of international humanitarian law, regardless of the specific type of war in which they occur. Hence, the term "war crime" encompasses acts committed during both international and civil conflicts.

Learn more about crimes here:

https://brainly.com/question/29308572

#SPJ11

The criteria for assessing whether a president's first 100 days are successful is that it takes aggressive action to address perceived problems.

The first hundred days are vital for a president's because they could assess whether they not only present what type of leader the president is but also serve as a period in which the president has more space to take aggressive action to address perceived problems. The first 100 days of the presidency often indicate the beginning of a leading politician's term in office. Listening and formulating an informed strategy, gaining key stakeholder buy-in, and then they roll out the strategy in a thoughtful way, so the right audiences are reached at the right time and with the right message.

To know more about the President:

https://brainly.com/question/2409724

#SPJ4

A fallacious argument is a widely accepted explanation that describes a fallacious argument as one that either exists deductively invalid or is inductively very weak or possesses an unjustified premise or that neglects relevant evidence that exists available and that should be comprehended by the arguer.

A faulty argument, according to a widely recognised definition, is one that either ignores pertinent evidence that is present and that the arguer should be aware of, or that is deductively invalid, inductively very weak, or involves an erroneous premise.

Invalid arguments, illogical arguments, false arguments, and/or deception are all examples of logical fallacies that weaken an argument. Fallacies of reasoning should be avoided when debating since they make a case weaker.

Fallacies can fall into two categories: An argument that has a premise and conclusion that cannot stand up to scrutiny is said to have a formal fallacy. An inaccuracy in the structure, substance, or setting of the argument is known as an informal fallacy.

To learn more about fallacy refer to:

https://brainly.com/question/27589479

#SPJ4

The decision ultimately depends on individual circumstances and personal preferences. However, there are some factors to consider that may aid in making a decision.

If the individual is willing to endure the conditions of prison, they may choose the 13 months in state prison with the possibility of early release due to good behavior and overcrowding. This option provides a finite timeline for the sentence and allows for a fresh start once released.

On the other hand, if the individual prefers to maintain their freedom and can commit to the weekly reporting requirement, they may choose the five years on probation option. This choice allows them to stay in their community and potentially maintain employment, but requires consistent compliance with the terms of probation.

It is important to note that probation violations can result in harsher penalties, including imprisonment, so careful consideration and commitment to following the terms of probation is necessary.

The reason for choosing probation is because it allows for more freedom and the opportunity to maintain or rebuild my life, including employment and relationships, while serving the sentence. Reporting to a probation officer once a week, even if it's 15 miles from my house, is more manageable compared to spending time in a state prison, which may have a more negative impact on my life in the long term. Additionally, probation provides an opportunity for rehabilitation and personal growth, whereas prison may not offer the same level of support.

To Know more about personal preferences.

https://brainly.com/question/27417027

#SPJ11

If you are sued in a tort lawsuit and lose, you are liable for damages and the most likely consequence is you will have to pay a financial judgment.

A tort occurs when someone either purposefully or negligently causes damage to another person or his parcel. It's a public evil, which comes to the court as a private act, as repelled to an illegitimate affair, which is achieved by the jurisdiction on behalf of the society as a whole.

However, also the court can codify the defendant to recompense the complainant for her damages If a complainant proves that a defendant has locked a tort and that the complainant has witnessed the penalty as a conclusion of it.

In an illegitimate case, by the discrepancy, the defendant who's condemned pays a fine to the jurisdiction, serves jail moment, or is fixed on the investigation as a penalty for the lawbreaking.

To learn more about lawsuits refer to

https://brainly.com/question/28521301

#SPJ4

The legal threshold in a criminal court needed in order for the prosecution to secure a conviction is to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt.

Reasonable doubt is a legal standard which a prosecution team must attain in order to secure the conviction of a person on trial.

  Reasonable doubt means that the prosecution must present to the court all admissible evidence to prove that a person on trial actually committed that crime and that all the evidence provided must have been obtained through an admissible means.

Conviction is the formal verdict which is issued by the jury in a competent court of jurisdiction that the accused of a crime is found guilty of that crime.

This means that the jury must have taken in to consideration the evidence set before it by both the defense and the prosecution team and that they have voted amongst themself and the number of votes for conviction outweighs the other.

Learn more about Reasonable Doubt at https://brainly.com/question/27077531

#SPJ1

Answer:

El derecho a la igualdad.

Explanation:

La declaración universal de derechos humanos establece que todas las personas son iguales y tienen los mismos derechos en los campos político, social y económico. Así, es incorrecto que una persona sufra discriminación, desprecio, prejuicio y cualquier otro tipo de injusticia por razón de su género, religión, opción sexual, edad, color, entre otros.

En este caso, podemos decir que si a alguien se le falta el respeto en el trabajo por ser mujer, se está vulnerando el derecho a la igualdad y esto podría tener consecuencias reales.

The court would need to consider the specific evidence and arguments presented by both parties before making a ruling on Adams' claims of libel against Nye and "The Ellen Show."

The court would assess the truthfulness of the statements made about Adams' qualifications and whether they meet the legal standards for defamation.

In a libel case, the court would evaluate the evidence presented by Adams and the defendants to determine the truthfulness of the statements in question. Adams asserts that she has studied the science involved in the tests, despite lacking a medical background. The court would likely consider whether Adams' claim of studying the science can be substantiated and whether it supports her assertion that the defendants made false and defamatory statements about her.

The court would also assess whether Adams' claim of never lying is true and relevant to the case. If the defendants can provide evidence that Adams has made false statements or misrepresentations in the past, it could weaken her argument that the charge is false and defamatory.

Ultimately, the court would weigh the evidence and arguments from both sides to determine whether the defendants' statements meet the legal criteria for libel. Factors such as the truthfulness of the statements, the intent behind them, and their potential impact on Adams' reputation would be considered in the court's ruling.

Learn more about The Ellen Show here:

https://brainly.com/question/2508232

#SPJ11

True. Sometimes courts rely on decisions made by other judges in previous cases, especially those that are relevant and similar to the matter at hand.

This practice is known as "precedent" or "stare decisis" and is commonly employed in common law systems.

False. Each provincial and territorial system of courts typically has multiple levels. There are usually multiple levels of courts, including trial courts, appellate courts, and in some cases, a final court of appeal. The final court of appeal is the highest level in the judicial hierarchy and is responsible for reviewing and deciding on appeals from lower courts.

Learn more about decisions  here:

https://brainly.com/question/29104188

#SPJ11

Answer:

Here's a sample answer:)

No, defense teams do not have the ability to defend against evidence. Usually, this is because there is not enough money or resources for them to use. This can also be affected by the type and/or amount of evidence presented. If there is undeniable evidence or an overwhelming amount of evidence it is very difficult to defend against such. Typically in this situation,the  legal strategy to undermine the prosecution’s case is used.

The quote establishes the judicial power in the United States, with one supreme Court and the ability to create inferior courts.

For more questions on United States

https://brainly.com/question/25899399

#SPJ8

No, Helen would not rev=cover any damages for her injury from Professor Green because Professor Green warned her that the chair is broken.

Professor Green informed Helen that the chair was broken, implying that it was not safe to use. By stepping on the chair despite this warning, Helen may have assumed the risk of injury and could be held partially or fully responsible for her own injuries due to contributory negligence.

Considering these factors, Helen's ability to recover damages would depend on the comparative negligence principles in the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of the case. If Helen's actions were deemed to be a significant contributing factor to her injury, her potential recovery of damages might be reduced or eliminated.

To know more about damages here

https://brainly.com/question/32167644

#SPJ4

-- The given question is incomplete, the complete question is

"Professor Green also tells Helen the following: 1. Don’t sell, under any circumstances, my two books on agency law because I can never remember all the silly rules. 2. Don’t stand on the chair because it’s broken. Helen steps on the chair to reach for a law book to sell it and injures herself. can she recover any damages for her injury from professor green?"--