A person who has Wernicke's aphasia is someone who has a communication disorder that is inability to understand the meaning of spoken words and sentences
A person who has Wernicke's aphasia is someone who has a communication disorder and such person is characterized by the following communication features:
negatively impacted communication abilities:
- Reading abilities
- Writing abilities
preserved communication abilities:
- intellectual abilities
- cognitive capabilities
Therefore, a person who has Wernicke's aphasia is someone who has a communication disorder that is inability to understand the meaning of spoken words and sentences
The chauffeur killed Lord Hazelton
This case can be solved from the facts discovered by Detective Percule Hoirot. The first fact to keep in mind is that:
- Lord Hazelton was killed by a blow on the head with a brass candlestick.
From this, it can be inferred that fact C. is not true because he did not die from a fatal dose of strychnine. In addition, it can be concluded that at the time of the murder in cook was not in the kitchen.
If the cook was not in the kitchen at the time of the murder, that means Sara was not in the dining room at the time of the murder (fact E). So it can be concluded that it was Lady Hazelton who was in the dining room.
If Lady Hazelton was in the dining room at the time of the murder, the one who killed Lord Hazelton was the chauffeur (Fact D)
According to the above, the one who killed Lord Hazelton was the chauffeur.
Note: This question is incomplete because the question is missing. Here is the question.
- Who murdered Lord Hazelton?
Learn more in: brainly.com/question/4163827
Answer:
A)
Explanation:
The main difference between these two terms is that a concurring opinion agrees with the majority decision, but for different legal reasons, while a dissenting opinion explains why one or more justices disagree with the majority. Each of which tends to ocurr often in court cases where various judges analyze and pass judgment of another judges decision on a specific case. With a concurring opinion most, if not all, judges agree with the decision that has been made but tend to give different reasons as to why they believe the decision was justified.
