Answer:
The correct answer is that eyewitness can be very flaky and untrustworthy.
Explanation:
To the jury, yes their is a eyewitness of this allegedly robbery that my client is being accused of, however how can we be certain that what he says is true. I agree their is nothing that can tell us this person is lying but also there is nothing that is telling they are telling the truth. People sometimes think they saw something when that thing did not occured, it may not be their intentions but the consequences that my client could suffer if you belive in whatever the eyewitness says can be very detremental. As well, for all we know this eyewitness could be the thief and they are saying they saw someone else do it to take the fault out of their way.
So please jury, dont think just because someone says they think they saw somethin that saw the right thing and that they are not lying.
Answer:
¿¿
Explanation:
I'm sorry can you repeat the question?
Answer:
The given scenario is an example of "Generalization".
Explanation:
- Generalization seems to be a term that relates to separate but related stimuli in almost the same direction or manner.
- For fairly obvious reasons, a dog trained to salivate to something like a sound of a specific pitch as well as sound intensity would often salivate with frightening regularity or frequency in addition to increases as well as lower tone signals.
So that the above is the correct answer.
Answer:
A stereotype is a belief about a certain group of people. Prejudice is a feeling about a person based on their membership in a group. Both stereotypes and prejudice can be either positive or negative. Discrimination is an action that denies the rights of a person due to their membership in a group.
