1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
nika2105 [10]
3 years ago
14

During the 2011 Arab Spring movement, the country of Bahrain stifled the voices of its protesters – restricting where they could

gather together and what they could say. Based on this information, which human rights did its government limit? Select all that apply. Heres the choices to the question: the right to drive automobiles the right to free speech the right to gather peacefully the right to travel to the United States the right to own property
Law
1 answer:
Nady [450]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

the right to own property

You might be interested in
According to the video, Municipal Clerks issue permits and licenses for what things? Check all that apply.
Klio2033 [76]

Answer:

where is video you are making fool to us

8 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
1. Read Both Bills. Circle the parts that the two
Andrei [34K]

Answer:

i dont know sorry xd

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Think about coverage you’ve seen of high-profile crimes or court cases. What do you think is helpful about media coverage of the
Veseljchak [2.6K]

Answer: Encouraging the courts to make the right choice

Explanation:

Media coverage is beneficial in the sense that it can keep the American public informed on rulings that would fundamentally set the groundwork for future rulings. For example take the case of the State of Minnesota v. Derek Chauvin. This was a rare example of a police officer being punished for grave misdeeds.

Media coverage may put pressure on a court to make a right decision. However in some cases this can become problematic, swaying the jury one way or another and making them partial when they are to remain impartial.

7 0
2 years ago
Which of the following cases established testimony by expert witness?
Ksivusya [100]

Answer:

Explanation:

Judge is the gatekeeper

The judge is to decide whether the expert is qualified to deliver reliable testimony and whether the expert's report is sufficiently reliable to be helpful to the Trier of Fact.

Rule 702 Testimony by Experts

1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data

2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods.

The Supreme Court identified four tests that can be used by the gatekeeper-judge to determine whether to admit the expert testimony. It is typically understood that it is not necessary for the expert testimony to pass all four tests.

1) Tested - Whether the theory or technique used by the expert can be, and has been, tested

2) Peer Review - Whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer review and publication

3) Error Rate - The known or potential rate of error of the method used is known or predictable

4) General Acceptance - The degree of the method's or conclusion's acceptance within the relevant scientific community

Review of five court cases

1) Frye v. United States - 1923 - established the "general acceptance" principle

2) Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 702 - 1975 - established the rule for "scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge" expert witness testimony

3) Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals - 1993 - established the four-part Daubert test for evaluating expert testimony

4) GE v. Joiner - 1997 - confirmed the trial judge's gatekeeper role

5) Kumho Tire v. Carmichael - 1999 - expanded the Daubert tests to apply to all disciplines

United States v. 14.38 Acres of Land

A good example of the application of the Daubert Test.

This is a rare case where the appellate court overruled the trial judge's gatekeeper role.

Gatekeeper is not intended to serve as a replacement for the adversary system: Vigorous cross-examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful instruction on the burden of proof are the traditional and appropriate means of attacking shaky but admissible evidence.

Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose

To secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding. In other words, the purpose is to make the process more efficient.

The report must contain:

(i) a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them;

(ii) the data or other information considered by the witness in forming them;

(iii) any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them;

(iv) the witness's qualifications, including a list of all publications authored in the previous 10 years;

(v) a list of all other cases in which, during the previous 4 years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition; and

(vi) a statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case.

That written report must contain, at a minimum, six items:

1) All opinions the witness will express and their foundation and reasoning;

2) Data and information considered by the witness;

3) Any exhibits that will be used while giving the testimony in court;

4) Witness qualifications, including all publications authored in the previous 10 years;

5) List of all other cases in the last four years where testimony was given as an expert at trial or deposition;

6) Description of the compensation for the study and testimony.

An appraisal report may need to be quite detailed. This may be at odds with the request of retaining counsel, who may want a less detailed report.

Report should include any exhibits which the witness anticipates using as "demonstrative evidence" during testimony.

report should include a statement of publications and testimony for the prescribed periods.

Some items of interest in this Rule are:

1 - If an objection is raised by one of the attorneys, the deponent will still be required to provide an answer, but that answer will be subject to approval by the court after hearing the objection.

2 - The deponent may refuse to answer a question only when it is necessary to preserve a privilege, enforce a limitation directly by the court, or present a motion under Rule 30(d)(4).

3 - The maximum time limit for a deposition is one day of seven hours.

4 - The deponent has the right to review and correct the transcript. He or she will have 30 days after receiving the transcript to review and submit corrections. However, this right must be affirmed and requested during the deposition. It is recommended that the appraiser expert always request this right to review and correct, as it will provide the appraiser with a copy of the transcript of the "oral report" for his or her workfile.

Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties

The time limit to respond is 30 days from the date of service of the interrogatories.

6 0
3 years ago
PLEASE HELP ME!!!:(( Why is physical fitness a characteristic that a good law enforcement officer needs?
fredd [130]

Answer:

Short answer? To be able to 100% do their job correctly.

Explanation:

Police officers should be able to have the body strength to over power somebody when needed, to chase someone if needed, and to break down barriers. They are also less likely to sustain any injuries when they have a better physical fitness ability.

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • According to Okun’s law,if the unemployment rate goes from 6% to 2%,what will be the effect on the GDP?
    5·1 answer
  • Explain the statement, "If we didn't
    13·1 answer
  • A woman shoots her husband. Then she holds him underwater for over 5 minutes. Finally, she hangs him. But 5 minutes later they b
    6·1 answer
  • Which level of government should have control over American policies on drugs? What problems might arise with level you chose?
    7·1 answer
  • How did watching the debate extend or broaden your thinking about the candidates and the campaign? What new information did you
    12·1 answer
  • Select the correct answer.
    6·2 answers
  • Please help me it’s due today:)
    12·1 answer
  • HURRRYYY PLEASE
    7·1 answer
  • The Supreme Court Case New Jersey v. TLO questioned the rights students had in public schools. TLO was a New Jersey high school
    12·1 answer
  • How would a jury determine that a person had no control of themselves when they committed a crime?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!