Answer:
The answer is B.
Explanation:
Expressive crime
Answer:
expressive crime
Explanation:
Expressive crime, which is sometimes termed affective aggression, involves violence that is not directed at the acquisition of anything tangible or designed to accomplish anything specific other than the violent outcome itself. Assaults, disorders, and domestic violence are examples of expressive crime.
Also, I took the quiz :)
international tribunal finds u.s. guilty of crimes against humanity
The systematic killing and maiming of unarmed African Americans by police amount to crimes against humanity that should be investigated and
over time, the supreme court has been more restrictive in its protection of the right to privacy.
The Supreme Court has not become more restrictive in protecting the right to privacy, so this claim is false.
We can arrive at this answer because:
The Supreme Court understood that the right to privacy is essential to protect citizens, especially those involved in marginalized situations.For this reason, the Supreme Court decided to expand the privacy rights and not restrict them as shown in the question above.This supreme court attitude is intended to promote greater protection for individuals who are marginalized and who may suffer intolerant and life-threatening attacks.
More information:
https://brainly.com/question/1145825?referrer=searchResults
Reporters have a responsibility both to inform the public and to protect their sources. From an ethical standpoint what should Jordan do?
Answer:
I believe that Jordan shouldn't post the story despite the fact reporters have a responsibility to inform the public, people shouldn't be put in the spotlight if they don't want to be in the spotlight. There are hundreds of things that could go wrong. What if someone out there sees this story and goes after the family right after they became a victim.
Which college or university is named after a former united states supreme court justice?
Compare what you know about paralegals with paralegals who are part of law shows on television. Make one statement about reading and gaining knowledge of paralegals and make one statement about paralegals portrayed in the media.
Paralegals, as I know them in person (and this may be in first person, or as experienced by a close acquaitance), do not command the kind of representation they are given in television shows.
Simply put, their job is to help lawyers do their job. The following include but are not a comprehensive list of what lawyers do:
Go for trials to defend their clients;Attend court hearings;initiate and or attend corporate and personal meetings; and sometimesget involved in police investigations etc.In the shows I have seen, they always seem smart, passionate about the cases they are working on, very ambitious, and always dressed in well-tailored corporate attire.
The reality that I have to accept is that:
Paralegals are not super-legal corporate figures. They are human too.Sometimes, they don't even love the job. For some, it's just another job to save up for their primary goalSome paralegals make very terrible mistakes. Not all of them are as smart as the job requires;They do not all dress for the part.People who are passionate about practicing law, perhaps, should read up about paralegals, and aim to practice as a paralegal before taking steps to become a lawyer.
I definitely would want the paralegals that I know to look and sound very smart like the ones often portrayed in the media.
Please read up more about paralegals here:
brainly.com/question/2763321