When command is transferred, then all personal involved in the incident should be told

1 answer:

5 0

As the command is transferred, the personnel involved in the incident should be informed of the effective time and date of transfer of the command.

<u>Explanation:</u>

The effective time and date of transfer of the command is essentially be told to the personnel involved in the incident as and when the command is transferred. Because they must be aware of the transfer in order to avoid misunderstanding of the current and previous command.

So that the chain of command remains integrated and not violated. The process of command transfer itself includes the briefing of the command involving all the personnel, but as the same in concern becomes secondary to action as primary being foretold to be the effective time and date.

You might be interested in

If asked questions by an officer, you may not remain silent during a traffic<br> stop?

torisob [31]

Answer:

could you go more into detail? you cant just be quiet But you can not give consent for them to search your car.

4 0

3 years ago

The right to be tried in the state and district where the crime occurred

Tcecarenko [31]

Answer:

That statement is found in the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights.

Explanation:

The Amendment states that the accused of a crime shall have the right to a speedy trial by an impartial jury of the State and district where the crimes were committed. The accused also have the right to be informed of whatever the charges are, be confronted with the witnesses against him and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

I hope this answer helps you.

7 0

3 years ago

rodikova [14]

Answer:

option a is the correct option

7 0

2 years ago

If you think you will have trouble remember all the directions you are given, it may be helpful to ______. a. write them down so

bonufazy [111]

Answer:

The answer is A

Explanation:

I think it is a sorry if u got it wrong

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Martina is arrested for a crime and refuses to take the witness stand at his or her trial.

Vlad1618 [11]

Answer:

In Griffin v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination not only allows a criminal defendant to refuse to take the witness stand during his trial, but it also bars the prosecutor from urging the jury to interpret that silence as an indication that the defendant has something to hide. The Court reasons that the right against self-incrimination would be meaningless if a defendant’s exercise of the right could be used against him.

Hope this helps

6 0

3 years ago