False, because some polls will pay people to answer a certain way to sway a poll in a certain direction. Not only this , but polls only sample a very small fraction of society , and thus do not accurately reflect society as a whole
Answer:
A) The history of the United States winning independence from Great Britain.
Explanation:
Both c and d are true. B would rather be a reason to stay rather than go.
Aztec farming has become most famous because of the brilliant
Chinampa system that Aztec farmers used.
Certainly there were a number of techniques used in the Aztec empire.
But with the great city of Tenochtitlan built on swampy but rich
ground, the <span>Chinampa </span>became key to the food production of the people.
Chinampa were, of course, not just used for the capitol city, but throughout the
Valley of Mexico around the lake bed. As the empire grew, more
sources of food were required. At times this meant conquering more
land, other times it meant expanding the <span>Chinampa </span>system.
Hope it helped :)
The answer is A: Concilium
The answer is: that evidence seized illegally cannot be used in a criminal trial.
<em>The Miranda rights</em> ( also known as Miranda warning ) is an oral notification given to a person in police custody. That person is usually accused of committing a crime or criminal offence.
The accused is given the right to remain silent, meaning they can refuse to answer any questions or give information to law enforcement officials. They also have the right to have an attorney present during their interrogation. If they can not afford one, <em>the court will appoint an attorney for them. </em>
The Miranda warning is only given if the individual in question is about to be interrogated, and not if arrested only.
This warning was established as part of the Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination. Any evidence obtained from an accused person without them being given the Miranda rights can not be used as evidence in court.
Miranda v. Arizona was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1966. It ruled that statements made by the defendant in an interrogation would only be admissible at trial if the individual was aware of his rights ( silence, attorney ), and that the individual understood the rights and voluntarily agreed to them.