The given statement " when it comes to homicide, statistically the perpetrator is more likely to be male and the victim is more likely to be female" is True because This statement is supported by crime data and research about 95% of homicide perpetrators worldwide are male.
Various studies have shown that men commit the majority of homicides. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), about 95% of homicide perpetrators worldwide are male. This can be attributed to various factors such as social, cultural, and biological influences that may predispose men to engage in more aggressive and violent behaviors.
On the other hand, it is also true that women are more likely to be victims of homicide, particularly in cases of intimate partner violence or domestic violence. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) about 38% of all female homicide victims globally are killed by their intimate partners, while the figure for male victims is much lower at around 6%. This illustrates that women are disproportionately affected by intimate partner violence and are more likely to be victims of homicide in these cases.
In conclusion, the statement is true that when it comes to homicide, statistically the perpetrator is more likely to be male, and the victim is more likely to be female. This pattern can be observed across different cultures and societies, suggesting a universal trend in gender differences in homicide perpetration and victimization. However, it is important to note that while these statistics provide a general overview, each case is unique and individual circumstances may vary.
To learn more about homicide here:
https://brainly.com/question/30638493#
#SPJ11
jeff johnson is the newest judge to take the bench in the fifth district of virginia. he spent 25 years as a prosecutor before being elected to the court. he is known for his lenient views on drugs and his extreme conservative views on crimes of violence. judge johnson is about to sentence a drug offender who has been convicted for the third time. judge johnson views drug abuse as a sickness and a public health issue, not a criminal issue. what type of sentencing for this defendant would the judge likely favor?
Judge Johnson is likely to favor leniency when sentencing the defendant in this case. Given his view that drug abuse is a sickness and a public health issue, he would likely opt for a more lenient sentencing, such as probation or community service, instead of harsher penalties such as incarceration. This could allow the defendant to get the help they need and potentially prevent future criminal activity.
Judge Johnson is also known for his extreme conservative views on crimes of violence. While this case does not involve violence, his past decisions demonstrate his preference for punishments that focus on rehabilitation rather than retribution. The judge could also take into account the defendant’s circumstances, such as any underlying mental health issues, and attempt to craft a sentence that is tailored to the individual.
He is likely to favor a sentence for the defendant that focuses on helping them find a path away from crime.
Know more about incarceration here:
https://brainly.com/question/14300869
#SPJ11
betty hunter, a patient at community health, fell out of bed. an incident report was created. betty's attorney is now seeking all records relevant to betty's fall. the incident report is least likely to be protected from discovery if it is maintained in:
According to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), the incident report is least likely to be protected from discovery if it is maintained in: medical records.
HIPAA stands for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, which was passed by the United States Congress. It includes a range of provisions that provide guidelines for how patient data can be protected and transmitted.
An incident report is a document used to describe an event that has happened within a healthcare facility, such as a fall. This report is important because it can provide valuable information to healthcare providers about how to prevent future accidents from occurring. Betty's incident report was created to document the circumstances surrounding her fall in the community health center.
Incident reports are not considered part of the official medical record because they are created to document safety and quality issues rather than for clinical purposes. Therefore, incident reports are usually not protected by HIPAA regulations and can be released to patients or their legal representatives upon request.
If the incident report is maintained in medical records, then it is likely to be protected by HIPAA. However, if the incident report is maintained separately from the medical records, then it is less likely to be protected from discovery by the patient or their legal representative. Therefore, the incident report is least likely to be protected from discovery if it is maintained in medical records.
For more such questions on incident report, click on:
https://brainly.com/question/29635795
#SPJ11
What has been one long-term result of the constitutional protection of free speech? A) fewwe cases involving minors, B) fewer laws limiting minority rights. ,C) a more accurate election, D) a more informed society
Answer:
D) a more informed society is considered one long-term result of the constitutional protection of free speech. The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to free speech, which has helped promote the exchange of ideas and opinions, and has allowed individuals to express their views and challenge the status quo without fear of retribution. This has led to a more diverse and informed society, where a wide range of viewpoints and opinions are expressed and debated, contributing to a more robust democracy.
When talking about an armed robbery case, a discussion about how explosives are made started. How can the discussion about explosives BEST be described in relation to the armed robbery case?
A.
relevant
B.
irrelevant
C.
interesting
D.
sophisticated
Answer:
Answer choice (B)
Explanation:
The discussion about explosives in relation to an armed robbery case can be considered as irrelevant unless there is evidence or suspicion that the perpetrator(s) used explosives in the commission of the crime. Otherwise, the discussion about explosives would not have any direct connection or relevance to the armed robbery case.
how does the criminal justice system play a role in counter terrorism
The criminal justice system plays a crucial role in counter-terrorism by investigating, prosecuting, and punishing individuals or groups who commit terrorist acts. It also works to prevent future terrorist attacks through intelligence gathering, surveillance, and analysis. Additionally, the criminal justice system provides support and assistance to victims of terrorism and their families. Overall, the criminal justice system plays a vital role in protecting national security and ensuring public safety.
the best statement of the test applied in determining if a defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries is:
Answer:
Explanation:
The best statement of the test applied in determining if a defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries is:
"Proximate cause is established when the defendant's conduct was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff's harm, and when the harm was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's conduct."
This statement encapsulates the two main elements of proximate cause: causation and foreseeability. Causation requires that the defendant's actions were a substantial factor in causing the harm suffered by the plaintiff, while foreseeability requires that the harm suffered by the plaintiff was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's conduct.
Together, these elements help to establish whether the defendant's conduct was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.
The best statement of the test applied in determining if a defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries is the "but-for" test. This test determines whether, "but for" the defendant's actions, the plaintiff's injuries would not have occurred.
The "but-for" test is a legal standard used to determine whether a defendant's actions caused the plaintiff's injuries. To satisfy the test, it must be established that, "but for" the defendant's actions, the plaintiff's injuries would not have occurred. In other words, the defendant's actions must be the direct, proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries. This is often established by proving that the plaintiff's injuries were reasonably foreseeable to the defendant at the time of their actions. This standard must be met in order for a plaintiff to successfully recover damages from a defendant. Overall, the "but-for" test is an essential standard used to determine if a defendant is responsible for a plaintiff's injuries.
Here you can learn more about plaintiff's injuries https://brainly.com/question/27463491]
#SPJ11
17. In Williams v. NC (1942), why did NC not accept the Williams' NV marriage? *
(1 Point)
the Williams were not bona fide NC residents
the Williams were not bona fide NV residents
the Williams committed the crime of bigamous cohabitation in NV
all of the above
In Williams v. NC (1942), the NC did not accept the Williams' NV marriage because the Williams were not bona fide NC residents. The Option A is correct.
What was the ruling in Williams v. NC (1942)?Williams v. North Carolina is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court determined that the federal government determines marriage and divorce statuses across state lines. Mr. Williams and Ms. Hendrix relocated to Nevada and divorced their respective spouses.
Mr. Williams and Ms. Hendrix married and returned to North Carolina after their divorces were finalized. They lived there together until they were charged with bigamous cohabitation by the state of North Carolina.
Read more about Williams v. NC
brainly.com/question/21925934
#SPJ1
1. Would any of the four be criminally liable for Jill’s drowning? If so, explain who and why
Criminal law is a set of laws related to a crime. Nobody will be prosecuted as no law law states that a foreigner must be saved.
Abe, the father of a drowning child, has a legal and moral obligation to try to save his child's life if he can do so without harm. However, he could be charged with manslaughter, If he decides to act.
Christie is presently in-charge. However, she could be charged with murder; If not, she could be charged with manslaughter or manslaughter, If he intended to kill the girl.
Chin doesn't appear to have committed any crimes. Hannah may have a moral obligation to act because she can probably save a drowning girl without putting herself in peril, but in utmost countries there's no legal obligation to save a foreigner.
-Felonious law prescribes behavior considered hanging , dangerous or else hanging the property, health, safety and moral security of people, including himself.
Question:
Abe takes his son Jill and his musketeers Christie and Chin to the lake. While stomping onto the wharf, Christie Chin deliberately bumps into Jill, knocking her into the water. Jill lands awkwardly and sinks to the ground. Chin pushes Christie down, ignoring the temblors. Hannah, an bystander and swimming expert, gapes at Christie but does nothing differently. Abe confronts the group and asks them to do something. However, will any of the substantiations be fulfilled? Should any of them be held responsible? explain your answer.
To know more about Criminal Law,
brainly.com/question/30000330
#SPJ4