Answer:
(1) Solicitation and manslaughter
2) Could be charges as an accomplice and manslaughter
Explanation: the following are crimes Dan can be charged with
(A) Solicitation: the offense that consists of a person inducing another to commit a crime the specific intent that the person solicited commit the crime .Dan incited Ann in committing crime asking her help for getting cyanide which she refused initially but eventually agreed.
(B) Manslaughter Dan took the law into his hands by trying to kill the bandit and eventually killed another.
Ann got involved by agreeing to buy the cyanide which makes her a crime accomplice.
In defense, Dan could say it was an accident since there was no intent or his lawyer can make sure they prove that the prosecution does not have enough evidence
To make the audience feel light-hearted and happy or to give the feeling of content
Answer:
self-fulfilling prophecy is a belief or expectation that an individual holds about a future event that manifests because the individual holds it
Explanation:
Self-fulfilling prophecy is a prophecy in which an individual makes his or prediction to come true unknowingly simply because he or she expects that to happen. For example, a football team manager expects academy graduates in their club to be less skilled and so he refuses to play them regularly, when he brings them on during football matches, they are rusty and don’t play well which makes his prophecy to come true.
Since negative thoughts can make things happen so are the positive thoughts as well. We need the positive thoughts in all cases and the following steps can break the cycle;
If the person who is the perceiver is motivated to obtain exact impression of the next person, then their expectation of that person would become more objective. In the other step, if the person or target knows that the perceiver bears wrongs expectation of him or her, then the target can adjust his or her behavior to counter such wrong expectations.
Answer:
Naturalistic observation, interviews, and case studies
Explanation:
Three of the most common research methods are naturalistic observation, interviews, and case studies. Each one of them brings something different to the table:
- Naturalistic observation refers to studying subjects directly on their environment without any intervention from the researcher. This is a great method because watching people behave in a natural way will be very revealing and more truthful. When subjects know they are being observed, they often change their behaviour. Naturalistic observation thus requires the observer to be as anonymous and invisible as possible.
- An interview is a research method where the subject is asked to answer to some specific questions crafted by the researcher. Interviews allow the researchers have a much closer look at the subject, trying to ascertain the motives behind their behaviour. However, a problem with interviews is that the subjects often time won't respond truthfully, but will adjust their answers to what is expected from them.
- A case study is a method that goes more in depth than the other two, and the researcher tries to learn as much as possible about the subject through a variety of other methods, like observations, interviews, surveys, etc. Case studies are much thorough and deeper investigations, but they can be very time consuming, and require a subject that is willing to facilitate the work of the researcher, which isn't always possible.
