Judging from your other questions, I would guess the Aztecs, because they had an extremely advanced civilization relative to their time period. However, you might want a second opinion to verify this. Hope this helps.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although the question is incomplete because it does not provide any menu to see the options, we can say the following.
Different sources are aimed at different audiences. Sometimes a source can be directed at more than a single group of people. Documentary films are usually aimed at the general population across the globe. Some sources may have a very specific audience. A literary journal can be specifically aimed at students or scholars with a background in literature.
It all depends on the kind of audience or reader. It is very important that the author defines its audience and then try to collect the kind of correct source to support the information the author is about to share.
Many times documentaries are aimed at general audiences in order to create some kind of awareness about an issue. But in the case of a literary or scientific journal can be specifically aimed at students, researchers, or scholars with a background in those subjects. It is a specialized publication.
<span>Conditions when Tsar Nick was in power were not good. The average working day was 11 hours, six days a week. This was also for very little pay. This is one of the main events in the early days of Russia which contributed to the 1905 Revolution. Overall, the working conditions were terrible. Hope this answers your question. : )</span>
Hello.
<span>It brought the African-American experience into the cultural conscious of the country.
Have a nice day</span>
Answer:
What does the fifth amendment protect?
The Fifth Amendment protects the right to avoid incriminating yourself. A defendant can plead the Fifth Amendment if a lawyer asks a question that the defendant would incriminate himself or herself by answering truthfully.
Explanation:
Constitutional Issue ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★
The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees that “no person . . . shall be
compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. . . .” This right was made
part of the Bill of Rights to prevent a tyrannical government from forcing accused persons
to confess to crimes they may or may not have committed. Miranda’s case before the
Supreme Court was based on this Fifth Amendment protection. The Court accepted the
case in order to explore and clarify certain problems arising from earlier decisions related
to the rights of individuals taken into police custody. The precise question that the Court
explored was under what circumstances an interrogation may take place so that a confession made during the interrogation would be constitutionally admissible in a court of law.
★★★★★★★
