Answer:
There are enough intent and action to commit a crime. By burglarizing the store and moving some goods to the rear door, Baker and his co-travellers have established specific intent to commit larceny.
Specific intent requires planning before the time and the predisposition to commit the act. They have even establish general intent by actually entering the store and cutting through the metal door with an acetylene torch.
Explanation:
Larceny is robbery. The intent to commit a crime by Baker and his co-travellers is established by their actions at the crime scene. They cannot be exonerated because they have not yet taken the goods away from the store. But, it can be established that the intent exists merely by their presence at the crime scene at such an hour of the morning.
Answer:
<h3>The notions of victim facilitation, precipitation, and provocation focuses on the victim's responsibility in prevailing a crime.</h3>
Explanation:
The notion of victim facilitation states that certain crimes occur because of victim's negligence. The victim is held equally responsible in the crime because of carelessness or by his/her mistakes.
The notion of precipitation applies to the acts that the victim contributes in making himself/herself a victim of a crime. For instance, when one tries to rob an armed person and in that process he/she gets shot, the notion of precipitation applies here.
The notion of provocation applies to those victims who gets victimized when they attack someone and the other person attacks them back severely in self-defense.
All three notions apply to the broader theme of shared responsibility. They are used in describing a victim's role in aiding a crime to occur. However, the notion of victim facilitation does not equally share the same concept of direct consequence as the other two notions. The notion of victim facilitation often justifies victim's role as accidental and unintentional. On the other hand, the two other notions both contributes directly as a consequence of their acts.
Answer:
C. There are multiple decision criteria.
Explanation:
Judgment is the ability to come up with a decision objectively and wisely in matters that affect actions, common sense or discretion.
Legally speaking a judgment is a decision given by a court or a judge and they get to that by deciding between multiple decision criteria.
I hope this answer helps you.
Answer:
It is the duty of Congress to have hearings in order to confirm a Supreme Court Justice nominee (as stated in the Constitution). This exclusive power rests on the U.S. Senate. The consensus, however, may be different and may vote against a nominee. Political parties within the Senate generally get in the way of who will vote and who won't, and vice-versa.
Explanation:
For example, Merrick Garland (former President Obama's nominee) was not given a hearing. Furthermore, Congress failed to perform the duties to have a hearing and decide whether to vote or deny a nominee. This is an example of how they refused to even vote on him. This is not the way government should operate.
