The equipment which <em>hostage negotiation team members</em> should carry in their car includes:
- Writing materials.
- The dossier of the aggressors (if already established)
- Communication equipment
- First aid.
<h3>What is Hostage Negotiation?</h3>
This refers to the discussion between armed aggressors and trained police officers in order to diffuse a hostile situation that involves the use of hostages.
Hence, we can see that some of the equipment which a hostage negotiation team would carry includes writing materials, communication equipment, first aid, etc.
Read more about hostage negotiation here:
brainly.com/question/1569401
Courts applying the Davis exception most often summarize it with phrases such as "ongoing emergency" or "emergency situation." When police are responding to an ongoing emergency, their motive is to ensure the safety of all concerned, not to collect evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in Davis that statements elicited by police while responding to an ongoing emergency are not testimonial for purposes of the Confrontation Clause.
Testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-ITlooks like the kind of testimony that would be offered at trial in aid of prosecution;
-It is made when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no ongoing emergency; and
-The primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to a later criminal prosecution.
The Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution protects the right of a criminal defendant to be confronted by his or her accusers in Court and to cross-examine any testimony that they may offer. The admission of hearsay (an out-of-court statement) – even if admissible under an exception to the rule against hearsay – can be in direct conflict with the right of Confrontation.
On the other hand, “non-testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-It is made primarily for the purpose of assisting police to meet an ongoing emergency; or
-It was made primarily for a purpose other than discovering, establishing or proving past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.
To learn more about Testimony visit here ; brainly.com/question/29244222?referrer=searchResultssearchResults
#SPJ4
Answer:
<u>Her actions were illegal</u>
Explanation:
We could make the conclusion that the attorney's actions were illegal. Consider, under the requirements of the law, an attorney acts as a representative to clients by giving advice to the clients, etc.
But they do not have the responsibility of making decisions for their clients <em>except</em> they receive the consent of their clients.
Answer:
The answer is B! Hope this helps
