Answer:
C Inadmissible, because it is extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement on a collateral matter.
Explanation:
A defendant is on trial for robbing a liquor store. The store clerk testified that the defendant came into the store at about 11 p.m., pointed a black gun with a silver grip at him, and demanded that he give him all the money in the cash register. The clerk testified that the store was well lit and that the defendant was not wearing a mask. The defendant's attorney called the clerk's employer to testify that when the clerk gave her a report of the robbery, he told her that the defendant pointed a silver gun with a black grip at him.
How should the trial judge rule on the admissibility of this testimony?
The evidence should not be accepted by the Judge. if the the earlier statement is contrary, it is not a enough to dismiss the witness.(A) and (B) are incorrect because, The clerk may be reliable or not. The evidence she provided is not enough to prosecute the defendant. she might not be totally correct in the reporting of the situation and might leave the judge confused. (D) is not correct
Answer:
Thaddeus Stevens
Explanation:
Thaddeus Stevens represented Pennsylvania in the US house of representatives. He was one of the members of Republican party and was against racial discrimination in elections.
In 1837, he refused to sign Pennsylvania constitutional conversion document owing to the inclusion of a voting provision that denied African - Americans voting rights. He stood by abolition of slavery and was against racial discrimination in grating American citizenship.
Answer:
Yeah,it happens with some people. But this fact doesn't really work with everyone.When you get older your immunity gets weak and you are attacked by many disease among which one can be Alzeheimer which ultimately leads u to memory loss...
HOPE IT HELPS YOU!!!!
Answer:
Transportation of materials, risk of natural disaster impacts, convincing people to move, drastic changes in the air at high altitudes for potential new residents, materials erode more quickly at higher elevation
Just ideas though.
Explanation:
Answer:
As is commonly accepted, the German Reich and Imperial Japan were allies in WW2. Maybe not surprisingly ,these two countries had embarked on similar ambitions at the eve of WW2, and their most important goals were to dramatically expand their sphere of influence, extend national borders by aquiring possessions from other countries and to grab hold of important resources (oil, strategic metal ores and land areas). Both countries developed a fierce nationalistic and racial code of hegemony. It followed that their adversaries were labeled as of inferior quality, and in wartime moves ,this usually carried with it contempt and harsh treatment of enemies. The Geneva code of warfare was mainly ignored by both countries. The defining element of cruelty was in the case of Nazi Germany, a monstrous master plan for the annihilation of the Jews. Which was also implemented on a gruesome scale. This appears to have no actual connection to the German war effort. Similarly, actions taken by Imperial Japan against the Chinese, bears the same mark of cruelty, if not in level or planned implementation (or motives) as with the German persecution of the Jews. Nevertheless, ruthlessness on an almost unprecedented scale was used against what was seen as the racially inferior , prisoners of war and occupied nations.
