Answer: He lacked the specific intent necessary for burglary because he believed that the bookie owed him the money.
Explanation:
Gambling can turn out sour sometimes, especially when results come out controversial. Although the defendant is not supposed to break into someone's home but according to the common law burglary he has some defense to make for himself which is he believed that the bookie owed him the money that's what he based his action for. The definition of common law burglary requires that the defendant break into the dwelling place with the intent to commit a felony. He would claim he didn't destroy any item or take more than what He was owed but just stocked to taking the money he was owed.
Answer: option 1,2,3, and 5
Explanation:
Answer:
Is it balanced?
Explanation:
The question tells a lot about my behavior analysis and what my willingness must be to do with the situation. The question is to asks two things which are fairness and rationality. If the decision is giving the person undue advantage and the person has a threatening tune then he will threaten me again. So the advantages demanded are danger sign for me. Their are number of questions you ask.
In some societies like Iraq, stealing books to read them is not a crime because the people think that he will definitely learn something valuable for his life.
So the best question here is "Is it balanced?".
The west is usa nato democracy and containment. The east is ussr capitalism Warsaw pact and communism
