Your answer is most likely:
D.
Full question:
Amy walked into her office cubicle and sat down. The entire episode with the blond man had taken well over two hours of her day. Plus, the police officers had told her the district attorney would also want to speak with her, which meant she would have to spend even more time dealing with this incident. She hoped her manager would understand.
Based on this case study, what security awareness measures, training documents, and posters had an impact on this event?
2. Do you think that Amy should have done anything differently? What would you have done in her situation? Ethic Decision Making Suppose that the blond man in the scenario was someone Amy knew socially. Suppose she also knew he had no relationship to the company and no business being in the building. If Amy chose not to make a report about the event, would she be violating her ethical position?
Answer and Explanation:
The security awareness documents and posters did not have any impact here as the Amy did not pay much attention to security measures.
Amy should have let her manager know all the details so that appropriate measures are taken to take care of security issues
she would be violating her ethical standards or position as security could be breached and it would be as a result of her lack of thoroughness and honesty
Answer:
A)
Explanation:
The main difference between these two terms is that a concurring opinion agrees with the majority decision, but for different legal reasons, while a dissenting opinion explains why one or more justices disagree with the majority. Each of which tends to ocurr often in court cases where various judges analyze and pass judgment of another judges decision on a specific case. With a concurring opinion most, if not all, judges agree with the decision that has been made but tend to give different reasons as to why they believe the decision was justified.
True. Hope I was a helping hand.
