Answer:
Arguments supporting and opposing the acceptance of gratuities and benefits A. Arguments in support of acceptance Appreciation Natural and reasonable to show appreciation to those providing a public service. Rude to refuse. Not significant Gratuities are not significant enough to buy or cultivate favour.
CAN YOU IDENTIFY ANY BIASES THIS AUTHOR MIGHT HAVE?
These 3 Common Arguments For Preserving the Electoral College Are Wrong from TIME Magazine
Why We Need the Electoral College from Real Clear Politics
This proposal calls for popular vote to determine the winner from PBS NewsHour
Answer:
cannot speculate on the personal biases of any author as it would require knowledge about their thoughts, beliefs, and values, which I do not possess. However, I can say that each of these articles presents a different perspective on the Electoral College and its role in American politics. It is up to the reader to critically evaluate the arguments presented and consider any potential biases or assumptions underlying them.
Explain the doctrine of legal guilt.
Answer:
Legal culpability relates to whether the prosecutor can establish beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed the crime. Whether you committed the crime or not, you are not legally guilty unless the prosecution has enough evidence to convict you beyond a reasonable doubt in front of a court or jury.
Explanation:
Brainliset Please!
Please provide an example of each stage of Lawrence Kohlberg's Moral Development Theory in either a single event or separate events for each stage in your scenario (which may be factual or fictional);
1.) Pre-conventional
2.) Conventional
3.) Post-conventional
SCENARIO TWO FACTS: Potter is a professional jockey who has been riding in horse races for ten years. Just after he left the starting gate, Potter's horse veered away from another horse approaching on his right and stumbled on a clod of dirt in the racetrack. Potter fell and injured his back. Potter sued the racetrack owners for failure to use due care in maintaining the racetrack.
1. Explain what, if any, responsibility each party has regarding the injuries sustained from the attack. Plaintiff Defendant​
2. What, if any, claim does the plaintiff have? Explain
3. What, if any, affirmative defense does the defense have?Explain
The plaintiff is Potter, the professional jockey who was riding in the horse race and got injured. The defendant is the racetrack owners, who are responsible for maintaining the racetrack.
What is the responsibility each party has?1. In this scenario, the plaintiff is Potter, the professional jockey who was riding in the horse race and got injured. The defendant is the racetrack owners, who are responsible for maintaining the racetrack.
The plaintiff may argue that the defendant had a duty of care to ensure that the racetrack was safe for the horses and jockeys to ride on. The defendant, on the other hand, may argue that they took all reasonable measures to maintain the racetrack, and the plaintiff's injuries were caused by the horse's behavior.
2. The plaintiff may have a claim for negligence against the defendant. Negligence is a legal theory that holds individuals or organizations responsible for the harm they cause as a result of their failure to take reasonable care to prevent that harm.
In this case, the plaintiff may argue that the defendant failed to use due care in maintaining the racetrack, which led to the plaintiff's injuries. To succeed in a negligence claim, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had a duty of care, breached that duty, and that the breach caused the plaintiff's injuries.
3. The defendant may have an affirmative defense of assumption of risk. Assumption of risk is a legal theory that holds that if a person engages in a risky activity, they accept the risks associated with that activity. In this case, the defendant may argue that the plaintiff, as a professional jockey, assumed the risks associated with riding in a horse race, including the risk of injury.
The defendant may also argue that the plaintiff was aware of the dangers of horse racing and chose to participate anyway, thereby assuming the risk of injury. To succeed with an assumption of risk defense, the defendant must prove that the plaintiff knew of the risks and voluntarily chose to assume them.
Learn more about plaintiff here:https://brainly.com/question/7315287
#SPJ1
Even though he's only 19 years old, Bennie has witnessed more murders than he can
count in his St. Louis neighborhood. He's been involved in his neighborhood gang
since he was in elementary school and has committed many illegal acts he felt
pressured to do. However, he's come to the point where he's making some contacts
outside of his gang friends when he walks to another neighborhood where his friend
Donny has moved. Donny tells him about other activities he's involved in, such as a
community center basketball program. By the time he turns 21, Bennie has started
spending less time with his friends in the gang and more time connected with his
friend Donny and Donny's welcoming family. He began to reject the view that the
gang is central to his life or that killing is "necessary to survive" as he used to believe.
Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of another human without reason or legitimate argument, particularly the unlawful killing of another human with hatred in mind.
How is a homicide defined?Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of another human without reason or legitimate argument, particularly the unlawful killing of another human with hatred in mind.
Depending on the region, this state of thought may differentiate murder from other types of unlawful homicide, such as manslaughter. Manslaughter is defined as murdering done without malice[note 1] and caused by reasonable provocation or reduced ability. Where it is acknowledged, involuntary manslaughter is a shooting that lacks all but the most diluted guilty purpose and carelessness.
Learn more about unlawful killing
https://brainly.com/question/28460818
#SPJ1