Answer: The best criticizism is that Bar exams "cost too much and exact great liabilities" Option A is the most correct option
Explanation: Bar exams are used to regulate the number of people that are practical layers. This exam is taken after you've successfully graduated from a law school.
The exam has been designed to favor only the rich, as the poor finds it very difficult to pay the fees involved. The law school is very costly, as the books and course handout are always costly. The exam is too costly that you need a loan that should not be less that $140,000 to complete your studies, leading to big liability to pay off, when you have started practicing. Even when you have passed the exams, you are still meant to pay for your license.
The government should try and subsidize the amount of money been paid for Bar exam, as this will help to increase the boundaries of licensing outstanding layers, thereby creating an equal opportunity chance for the rich and the poor to practice law.
Answer:
the others are already answered
Explanation:
For general intent, the prosecution need only prove that the defendant intended to do the act in question, whereas proving specific intent would require the prosecution to prove that the defendant intended to bring about a specific consequence through his or her actions, or that he or she perform the action
Answer: See explanation
Explanation:
With regards to the question, Howell has committed fraud. In this case, this can be regarded as a mail or wire fraud which is when one uses telephone or mail to defraud someone else.
In this case, Howell may be charged for the unauthorized use of the telephone for his personal use as he made a long-distance telephone calls through the telephone company’s computer- controlled switching system to solicit funding for a nonexistent business enterprise. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act helps address this type of fraud.
