Two people agreed to steal a valuable painting that they knew was hanging in the victim's home. One would wait in the car with t
he engine running to ensure a quick getaway, while the other would break into the victim's home and steal the painting. The burglar broke into the home and reached the victim's library, where the painting was hanging. On the desk he noticed a large vial that appeared to contain cocaine. Thinking he could sell the cocaine and split the proceeds with the getaway driver, the burglar grabbed the vial and stuffed it in his pocket. He then took the painting off the wall and hurried back to the waiting car. The police arrived at that moment and apprehended the pair. A search incident to arrest turned up the vial of cocaine in the burglar's possession. The getaway driver is charged with being an accomplice to the unlawful possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. Will the driver likely be found guilty
The getaway driver will most likely be forind guilty as they are both involved in the burglary theft just only for his partner to cart away additional stuff (cocaine) what chbwas not part of the initial agreement. However, one thing still remains, which is that the getaway driver and the cocaine thief acted together in other to perform an unlawful burglary. What the getaway driver is being charged for is being an accomplice which he actually his just not on the theft of cocaine. But that the only way he could be cleared of being an accomplice on cocaine theft is for the other thief to confess which will still lead them into another court case.
I think that the best answer is this one: <span>b) They believed monopolies were responsible for the growth of the economy
a) cannot be true, as monopolies are the opposite of competition. c) is also not acurate d) might be accurate but it doesn't explain why the government was interested in allowing this - and b) does. </span>
