Answer:
The United States first amendment carried more protection and less restriction in its implementation and here is why.
The edict of the United States does not qualify the application of the clause granting freedom of expression. That of the United Kingdom does. In doing so, it ensures that Freedom of Expression is used appropriately in that it must be targeted at the common good and the well being of the state.
It states, for instance, that
<em>"Public authorities may restrict this right if they can show that their action is lawful, necessary and proportionate in order to:
</em>
- <em>
protect national security, territorial integrity (the borders of the state) or public safety
</em>
- <em>prevent disorder or crime
</em>
- <em>protect health or morals
</em>
- <em>protect the rights and reputations of other people
</em>
- <em>prevent the disclosure of information received in confidence
</em>
- <em>maintain the authority and impartiality of judges"</em>
Cheers!
Answer:
D
Explanation:
because i just know it and i did it
Answer:
well
Explanation:
If they are not careful the results can be wrong and they might mess up the evidence. The evidence is so critical to what ever they have to solve. Again tho, The results can also be wrong, and they could mess up something really bad.
Answer:
In order of what you said,
1. Motion for Suppression
2. Motion for Continuance
3. Motion for Discovery
4. Motion for Bill of Particulars
Explanation:
I got this correct.
PLATO gang
Answer: The service of skilled craftsmen who have rate
