Answer:
Naturalistic observation
Explanation:
While doing a study if a subject is observed in their natural environment it is known as a naturalistic observation. The observer has no influence over the behavior of the subject.
A analog observation is an observation of a subject in an artificial environment.
Here, the doctor is studying the ways that mothers and their toddlers interact throughout the day. The doctor has no influence over the behavior of the toddler and the mother. Hence, she is observed in a naturalistic observation.
B. moles or marks on the body
Witchcraft was the period of panic and hysteria in the 17th century and often regarded as most captivating chapters of American history. In North America, young girls started having mysterious screaming fits and on diagnosis, it was revealed that the girls have been bewitched. This began the dramatic and strange search for witches. However, witch hunters started looking for devil marks or witch marks on suspected women bodies. Witch marks included the variety of skin lesions such as red, blue, brown lesions or many time unusual moles and outlines.
He conquered all of the egypt
Answer:
The correct answer is C. A judge could throw out the teen's confession unless the officer complies with the ruling in Miranda v. Arizona.
Explanation:
Miranda v. Arizona is a ruling of the United States Supreme Court from 1966. The case established the current practice whereby a suspect is required to read his or her rights (the so-called Miranda rights) without exception, which state the right to before a preliminary investigation of the suspect has begun.
That was the decision in Ernesto Miranda's trial. Miranda was arrested on suspicion of kidnapping and sexual assault of an 18-year-old girl on prima facie evidence. After two hours of questioning, Miranda signed the confession. However, he had never been informed of the possibility of meeting a legal adviser or of being silent, and that his confession could not be used against him. During the trial, Miranda's attorney, Alvin Moore, argued that confession would therefore not apply in court. Moore's objection was rejected and Miranda was sentenced to a lengthy prison sentence. The Arizona Supreme Court also upheld the ruling.
The United States Supreme Court, by a vote of 5 to 4, ruled that, due to the Fifth and Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, no confession would be valid unless the suspect was informed of his rights. The Fifth Amendment states that no one can be compelled to testify against himself and the Sixth Addendum secures access to a lawyer. Ernesto Miranda's judgment was overturned, but he was later sentenced to prison for the same case, based on other evidence.
