Answer:
Under both statutes.
Explanation:
The meeting shown in the question above managed to violate two statutes, according to the statute developed to combat organized crime, in addition to violating the study that prohibits interstate drug transport. In that case, the convict must be tried for two infractions in different statutes and if convicted he must be convicted based on the guidelines of the two statutes.
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: I would think yes.
Explanation:
Answer:
maybe they didn't like it?
