What is the difference between sedition and treason.

Most of the empirical work on the influences of the group individual behavior took place in microsystem ( option B)

The interaction between people and groups is the main focus of research on human behavior. It incorporates aspects of sociology and psychology and offers insights into management and leadership.

A microsystem is a place where the developing individual experiences distinct physical traits, resources, routines of behaviors, roles, and interpersonal relationships. The word experience is a significant component of this definition.

A person's perception of the environment and his or her place in it can also play a role in how a microsystem is characterized, in addition to any characteristics that an objective observer could notice. People labor in a variety of microsystems, including their families, workplaces, friendship groups, and social or religious communities.

Therefore, people get more involved in more microsystems with various patterns as they get old.

Learn more about human behavior from

/brainly.com/question/7629067

#SPJ1

Answer:

conflict theory: A social science perspective that holds that stratification is dysfunctional and harmful in society, with inequality perpetuated because it benefits the rich and powerful at the expense of the poor.

Does this help?

The term "unauthorized practice of law" refers to when a person, not licensed or authorized to practice law, engages in activities that require legal expertise. In the context of CPA s (Certified Public Accountants), they are experts in accounting and financial matters, but not in law. If a CPA provides legal advice or represents clients in legal matters without proper licensing, they would be engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, which can lead to penalties and disciplinary actions.

The term "unauthorized practice of law" refers to individuals who are not licensed attorneys but still engage in activities that are typically reserved for lawyers. This can include giving legal advice, representing clients in court, or drafting legal documents. For CPA s, the line between what constitutes legal advice and financial advice can be blurry. While CPA s can offer guidance on financial matters, they must be careful not to cross over into providing legal advice, which could be considered unauthorized practice of law. It is important for CPA s to stay within the scope of their licensure and seek legal counsel if necessary to avoid any potential legal consequences.

learn more about unauthorized

https://brainly.com/question/26210364

#SPJ11

Answer:

Law enforcement

courts

corrections

(i think its the 2nd one)

Section 1231 and Section 1245 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code pertain to the taxation of property used in business or held for investment purposes. The key difference lies in how gains or losses from the sale or disposition of these properties are treated.

Section 1231 property refers to real or depreciable property used in a trade or business, such as buildings or machinery. Gains from the sale of Section 1231 property are generally treated as long-term capital gains, while losses are considered ordinary losses.

On the other hand, Section 1245 property primarily refers to tangible personal property used in a trade or business, like equipment or vehicles.

Gains from the sale of Section 1245 property may be subject to recapture, which means they could be taxed as ordinary income to the extent of depreciation deductions previously claimed.

To know more about Revenue Code refer to-

https://brainly.com/question/32253511

#SPJ11

Answer:

I think grid search could be used when you have many investigators available and are looking for the same person

In federal court, there are several authorized ways to serve process on an individual without a court order. These include:

Personal Service: This is the most traditional method of service, where a process server personally delivers the summons and complaint to the individual.

Mailing: Service can be accomplished by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint by first-class mail, with an additional copy sent by certified mail, return receipt requested.

Waiver of Service: An individual can waive their right to service by signing a written waiver of service form, which must be filed with the court.

Substituted Service: Service can be made at the individual's residence or usual place of abode by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint with someone of suitable age and discretion who lives there.

Service by Publication: In certain circumstances, service can be made by publishing notice of the lawsuit in a newspaper of general circulation in the area where the individual is believed to reside.

It is important to note that these methods are subject to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure and the jurisdiction where the process server serves the summons. Also, the court may require additional steps to be taken to serve the process in certain circumstances.

Find out more about Federal court

brainly.com/question/14114384

#SPJ4

Carl's common-law partner would not be qualified to receive any of his estate unless they are specifically included in a will or other legal document.

Most likely, his two young children would inherit the most of his estate. A person with the legal right to receive an inheritance from ancestors who passed away without leaving a will is known as an heir (known as intestate). When such a property owner passes away, their legal successors will need to handle matters including property inheritance and other claims. In the event of a divorce, the wife will no longer have any claim to the property and will become the sole owner of all of its contents.

To know more about legal document refer to the link below :

brainly.com/question/29368022

#SPJ4

The legal doctrine that gave white women no political and economic rights but granted them to their husbands was known as coverture.

Under coverture, a married woman's legal rights and obligations were subsumed by those of her husband. This meant that a woman could not enter into contracts, own property, sue or be sued in her own name, or exercise political rights such as voting or holding public office. Instead, all of her legal rights and obligations were managed by her husband. This doctrine was based on the idea that a husband and wife were one legal entity, and the husband was the head of that entity. The doctrine of coverture was widespread in English common law and was also adopted by many American states during the colonial and early national periods.

To learn more about political, click here:

https://brainly.com/question/28567848

#SPJ4

On September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, people all over the world joined together to grieve the deaths of friends, family, strangers, and acquaintances.

The September 11 attacks, also known as 9/11, were a series of four coordinated killing terrorist attacks on the US. This was carried out by al-Qaeda, a militant Islamic radical network.

People all crossways the world-wide bring together after the violent attacks on September 11, to suffer the deaths of people including the family, strangers, and acquaintances.

Therefore, September 11, citizenries combine after the terrorist attack.

To learn more about the attacks, refer to:

https://brainly.com/question/17011824

#SPJ2

Answer:

itz a case...

Explanation:

Renowned forensic scientist Henry Lee said Thursday that the O.J. Simpson double-murder trial in 1995 not only revealed the racial chasm in America but the importance of strictly following established protocols in processing crime scenes.

“There were so many issues with the major crime scene in that case,” said Mr. Lee, who holds a doctorate and who testified for five days as a defense expert for Simpson. “This case set the landmarks for crime scene and laboratory handling of evidence.’

Mr. Lee’s comments came on the first day of the two-day inaugural conference “Pioneers of Forensic Science,” at which he is the first honoree. One of the world’s foremost criminalists, Mr. Lee has been involved in the Laci Peterson, JonBenet Ramsey, Caylee Anthony and Vince Foster cases, among many others.

Mr. Lee, Connecticut’s chief emeritus of scientific services, has served as that state’s commissioner of public safety, forensic science laboratory director and chief criminalist. He is the founder of the University of New Haven’s Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science and is the namesake of its Henry C. Lee College of Criminal Justice and Forensic Sciences.

He spoke on a panel “People v. O.J. Simpson: An Interdisciplinary Retrospective on the Case that Brought Forensic Science to the World.”

Other panelists included F. Lee Bailey, a member of Simpson’s “Dream Team” of defense attorneys; Dr. Michael Baden, former chief medical examiner for New York City who also was a Simpson defense expert; and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, Pittsburgh’s renowned forensic pathologist who was an expert commentator on the Simpson case on national television programs. He also is the namesake of Duquesne University’s Cyril H. Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law, the conference sponsor. University President Kenneth G. Gormley, who holds law degree, moderated the two-hour panel discussion.

A native of China, Mr. Lee said he had no idea who Mr. Simpson was when he was asked to be an expert for him at trial. He reconstructed the crime scene and examined every piece of evidence collected.

“I knew there was something wrong with the case by the physical evidence. There were lots of problems.”

He discovered that notes taken by Los Angeles Police Department criminalists at the scene were later substituted with other documents. “We found this out because the notes are stapled, but we found extra staple holes,” meaning they had been re-stapled.

Mr. Lee recounted his testimony about a crucial piece of the prosecution’s evidence—a bloodstain found on the walkway outside the Bundy Drive home where Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman were killed in June 1994.

DNA tests indicated O.J. Simpson was the likely source of the blood, but Mr. Lee testified he was suspicious because he discovered four small patches of blood on the paper packet wrapped around the Bundy evidence. That would indicate the blood swatches were wet and leaked onto the paper, yet LAPD technicians had testified that they left the swatches to dry overnight.

Asked by defense attorney Barry Scheck to account for the stains, Mr. Lee famously answered, “The only explanation I can give under these circumstances is, something’s wrong.”

As a scientist, Mr. Lee wouldn’t speculate either at the trial or at Thursday’s conference about how that could have occurred, but Mr. Bailey isn’t a scientist, so he wasn’t so circumspect. That evidence and the infamous glove and the bloody sock and anything else indicating Simpson’s guilt was planted, he said.

The kind of speech in the photograph might be restricted if it takes place at a certain location, time, or in a particular way, according to past Supreme Court decisions.

The Supreme Court of the United States is the top court in the land and the only branch of the federal judiciary that the Constitution directly calls for. The number of Supreme Court justices is not clearly forth in the Constitution; rather, Congress determines the number. Along with the Chief Justice, the President of India has appointed 30 more judges to the Supreme Court of India. Judges of the Supreme Court begin their retirement at age 65. The supreme court is the highest court in the majority of legal systems. The terms "court of last resort," "apex court," and "high (or ultimate) court of appeal" are also used to refer to these courts.

Learn more about Supreme Court here

brainly.com/question/28046758

#SPJ4

The Virginia gentry supported the demands of yeomen farmers to close the law courts in 1774 to protest unfair practices and the influence of British authorities on the colonial legal system.

The Virginia gentry, which consisted of wealthy landowners and influential individuals in colonial Virginia, supported the demands of yeomen farmers to close the law courts in 1774 for several reasons. First, both groups shared concerns about the British authorities' control over the colonial legal system, which they viewed as unjust and favoring the interests of the British crown.

By closing the law courts, they aimed to challenge and resist British influence and assert their rights as colonial subjects. Second, the gentry understood the grievances of yeomen farmers who faced difficulties in accessing justice due to high fees and unfair practices within the legal system.

By supporting the closure of law courts, the gentry aimed to address these concerns and demonstrate solidarity with the yeomen farmers in their struggle for justice and fair treatment.

Visit here to learn more about legal system:

brainly.com/question/10456202

#SPJ11

your choice

Explanation:

Law school take 3 year

it's intense and comptive

have to read really long books

But it easier to get into than medical school

Answer:

Law school is not a bad idea for every student

Explanation:

but it certainly can be a bad idea for some students. If you have unreasonable expectations of what a lawyer's work entails, how much money you will make, or if you have the wrong reasons for wanting to attend, than law school can be a bad idea.

Brainlest

good luck! :D

The budget or allocated money will be as follows:

Savings: 20/100*575 = $115 while others such as

Clothing, Entertainment, and Charitable Giving (wants) are budgeted from the savings.

Since all the money has been allocated as follows:

BUDGET:

TAKE HOME PAY - $1,770

NEEDS - $1,195

AMOUNT TO SPEND - $575

Savings - $0

Wants - $0

It looks like one has already allocated all of one's money to one's "needs" category, so there is no money left for "wants" or for savings. It's important to have some money set aside for both of these categories, as well as for emergencies.

One needs to set aside some money for savings and for emergencies. The amount one should save will depend on one's financial goals and one's overall financial situation. It has been recommend that one should be saving at least 20% of one's income, but you may want to save more or less depending on your situation.

Once you have set aside money for savings and emergencies, you can start budgeting for your "wants." This might include things like clothing, entertainment, and charitable giving. Be sure to allocate all of your remaining money, so you have $0 left at the end of the month. This will help you to stay within your budget and avoid overspending.

Therefore, since need is germane, hence, after fulfilling the needs, one can the save out of the remaining amount and then from it attends to one's wants.

learn more about budget: https://brainly.com/question/8647699

#SPJ1

Answer:

0

200

200

175

I did it

In the Confession Tapes documentary, several cases are highlighted where confessions may not be reliable or accurate due to being involuntary, coerced, or false.

Here are a few examples:

1. Case of Atif Rafay and Sebastian Burns: In this case, the two defendants were accused of a triple murder. The documentary examines how their confessions were obtained after lengthy interrogations, involving psychological pressure, manipulation , and false promises of leniency. The confessions were later retracted, and the defendants claimed they were coerced into confessing to a crime they did not commit.

2. Case of Adrian Thomas: Adrian Thomas was accused of killing his infant son. The documentary explores how his confession was obtained through a prolonged and intense interrogation, during which the police used manipulative techniques, fed him details of the crime, and coerced him into confessing. The confession was later ruled inadmissible in court due to its involuntary nature.

3. Case of Russell Williams: Russell Williams, a former Canadian military officer, confessed to multiple crimes, including ual assault and murder. However, the documentary delves into the circumstances surrounding the confession, suggesting that it may have been coerced or obtained under duress due to the extreme psychological pressure exerted on him during the interrogation.

These examples highlight the potential issues with confessions when they are obtained through coercive tactics, psychological manipulation, or under duress. It underscores the importance of ensuring that confessions are voluntary, informed, and free from undue influence or coercion to maintain their reliability and accuracy.

Learn more about manipulation here:

https://brainly.com/question/28459068

#SPJ11

Answer:

true. they can be charged with Vehicular Manslaughter

Answer:

a test of your school knowledge

Explanation:

A school based assessment​ is a process that requires the teachers to mark their students' work for fair assessment of their periodic performance.

The assessment is used as a information to increase students learning and development

In conclusion, the school based assessment is important because its allows to assess the performance of students.

Read more about school based assessment​

brainly.com/question/26921511

Answer:

The overview of the particular question becomes demonstrated in the following portion on the clarification.

Explanation:

Answer:

the boy's genes

the history and family dynamics

Explanation:

Behavior, dedication to studies and intelligence, are characteristics that can be highly influenced by the genetics that an individual presents, as well as by the environment in which that individual is inserted. Based on this statement, in order to present conclusions about the boy shown in the question above, the doctor would need to assess the boy's genetic makeup, analyzing the genes and being able to look for how it affects his behavior. However, the doctor will also need to know the dynamics and family history, to know how the environment that the boy is inserted in has influenced him.

Answer:

the shape of the boy’s skull

Explanation:

In the second case, Deason v. Ellis, the court will most likely apply stare decisis and divide the water rights because the facts of the two cases are similar.

It should be noted that facts simply means the evidence that are presented in a literary work or a research.

In this case, in the second case, Deason v. Ellis, the court will most likely apply stare decisis and divide the water rights because the facts of the two cases are similar.

Learn more about facts on:

brainly.com/question/25465770

#SPJ4

Answer:

I do think that 'notice and hearing' is the suitable option!

Answer:

The rich would be powerful,

Explanation:

There would be no rights for middle class/poor.And we would all be slaves to the rich.And you could never be proven innocent

Answer: It could lead to very unfair things, and one group might try taking advantage of their power.

In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court issued a strong statement regarding the protection of freedom of the press and the unconstitutionality of prior restraint.

The Court held that the government could not censor or prohibit a publication in advance, except in very limited and specific circumstances. This decision reinforced the First Amendment rights to free speech and freedom of the press, emphasizing the importance of these liberties in a democratic society.The Court held that the government cannot prevent publication or dissemination of material unless it poses a clear and present danger to national security.In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court issued a strong statement regarding the First Amendment's protection of freedom of the press. The Court held that a Minnesota law that allowed for the prior restraint of publication of newspapers was unconstitutional. Prior restraint is the government's censorship of speech before it is published or spoken. The Court found that the Minnesota law violated the First Amendment because it allowed the government to censor speech based on its content, rather than on its impact on public safety.

The Court's decision in Near v. Minnesota was a landmark ruling that helped to establish the principle that the First Amendment protects freedom of the press from government censorship. The decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving freedom of speech, and it remains an important precedent today.

The specific language of the Supreme Court's statement in Near v. Minnesota is as follows:

   The general principle that the First Amendment precludes the existence of any prior restraint upon publication cannot be doubted.

The Court went on to explain that the First Amendment protects freedom of the press because it is essential to a free and democratic society. The Court stated that "the press was to be free from previous restraints because it is essential to the role of the press to serve as a check on government power."

The Court's decision in Near v. Minnesota was a major victory for freedom of the press, and it helped to ensure that the First Amendment would continue to protect the right of the press to publish without government censorship.

To learn more about Supreme Court  visit: https://brainly.com/question/25903338

#SPJ11

Answer: D all future generations

Explanation:

Answer:

the answer is D.

Explanation:

i hope this helps. Dont now how to explain it but  know this is the correct answer.  

The essential og a valid contract is d. definiteness of terms so a court can figure out what to enforce.

The definiteness of terms is one of the essential elements of a valid contract. This means that the terms of the contract must be clear and unambiguous, so that a court can know what the parties agreed to. If the terms of the contract are not definite, the contract may be unenforceable.

The other options are not essential elements of a valid contract. Option a is important, but it is not an essential element. Option b is not an essential element, because the intent of the parties can be judged objectively, even if it is not communicated in the way the offeror wants to communicate it. Option c is not an essential element, because the communication of the offer is not an essential element of a valid contract.

Learn more about contract on

https://brainly.com/question/5746834

#SPJ1

The essential elements of a valid contract is

a. a description of the parties' capacity to contract so the court knows that they are able. b. intent judged objectively. c. communication of the offer in the way the offeror wants to communicate it. d. definiteness of terms so a court can figure out what to enforce.

Hearing is a session that takes place without a jury before a judge in which evidence and/or arguments are presented to determine some factual or legal issue. The correct answer is A.

A hearing is a legal proceeding where evidence and arguments are presented to a judge to determine a factual or legal issue. Hearings are typically conducted in courtrooms or other official settings and may involve witnesses, testimony, and cross-examination.

Hearings can cover a variety of legal issues, such as motions to dismiss a case, bail hearings, or preliminary hearings to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial. The purpose of a hearing is to allow both sides to present evidence and arguments to a judge, who will then make a decision based on the facts presented.

Unlike a trial, a hearing is typically held without a jury, and the judge is responsible for determining the outcome of the case.

To know more about legal issue, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/30178117#
#SPJ11

Limited jurisdiction courts, also known as special jurisdiction, refers to the court's authority over only certain types of cases, such as bankruptcy and family matters.

Only cases with a certain subject area may be heard and decided by a court with limited jurisdiction. Only cases that fall under federal law or those that satisfy the criteria for diversity jurisdiction may be heard by federal district courts.

For example, courts like the U.S. Tax Court and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, are limited jurisdiction courts and only hear particular kinds of cases.

Limited jurisdiction courts, as opposed to general jurisdiction courts, derive their authority from an issuing authority, such as a constitution or a statute. Special jurisdiction courts must show that they have the authority to exercise jurisdiction under their issuing authority.

To know more about limited jurisdiction, click here:

https://brainly.com/question/29553713

#SPJ4