Answer:
i'm pretty sure it's true because they consider it murder anyways.
Explanation:
Answer:
Neither man wanted to press charges.
Explanation:
I'll just say why the other answers are wrong
B. There are witnesses, it says that several people were loitering around the club
C. There does not need to be camera footage of the fight to arrest one or both of the men and charge them with assault, battery, etc.
D. The officers arrived after the fight had ended and they had been injured, also officers do not personally have to witness a crime to charge an individual with one.
Answer: No, because a dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction is not on the merits.
Explanation:
Following the information given in the question, it should be noted that the case should not be dismissed by the court due to the fact that the dismissal is based on the lack of personal jurisdiction.
It should be noted that the claim preclusion should be added to the answer of the defendant as it's an affirmative defense and it requires more than the claimant bringing a case against the same defendant.
The given statement “It is well understood and specified that the privileges prolonged under the Habeas corpus writ is not suspended until unless there is a case of rebel” is true.
Answer: Option 1
<u>Explanation:
</u>
The case where there is rebel or in case of invasion, the suspension is achieved for the Habeas corpus writ. This is in accordance to the suspension clause of the constitution with the section of 9 in clause second under the Article 1.
The rebel or invasion is for the requirement of public safety as in regard. If in the case raised, then the President, only one who had the power to suspend it as per the constitution.