Answer:
Say you don't want to speak till you get a lawyer. That they are wrong you are gonna sue them for wrongful prosuction. Then when you get your lawyer state you alibia and how your not guilty.
Explanation:
Answer: c. Represented progress in the cause of civil rights for African-Americans. It also
(d). reflected the racism that was prevalent in the South during the 1930s.
Explanation: In the Scottsboro case, Nine young black Americans ages 12 to 19 were charged with raping of two white women in a train near the small town of Scottsboro, Alabama.
The case was vital in the pursuit of civil rights and protection. The case also led to two landmark Supreme Court rulings that established important rights for criminal defendants and a fair hearing. The Supreme Court also reversed the judgement because the jury was only made of white people and there was no fair hearing of the case.
Their trials began and eight of the nine boy having been found guilty of the charges by a racist all-white juries were sentenced to death in the electric chair despite reasonable evidences that they were not quilty but innocent.
Answer:
Case 1 (Fordjour v. Ahmed case on rent) and Case 3 (Giz Construction v. Ministry of Roads on Nonpayment of project ) are civil cases which entail one party by talking the other party to court over money. Ahmed was taken to court by his landlord Fordjour over rent arrears while Minirtsy of Roads was taken to court for non-payment of project by Giz Construction. Case 2 (GRA v. Melcom over Tax payment) is criminal case as it entails Melcom violating laws stipulated by the government.
The correct answer is: The great compromise resolve the dispute between small population states and large population states. The 3/5 compromise said that three out of every five slaves could be counted when determining the states population size for determining how many seats that state would receive in the house of representatives. I would appreciate if you would mark Brainliest if this answer was helpful, thanks!
Explanation:
la Corte Suprema de Justicia convalidó la facultad policial de detener sin orden judicial a personas en "actitud sospechosa
En el caso del numeral 1 de este artículo, si la búsqueda o persecución ha sido interrumpida, se requiere orden judicial. En ningún caso se puede practicar el arresto cuando se trate de infracciones de acción privada o de aquellas en las que no está prevista pena privativa de libertad.
