Answer: He lacked the specific intent necessary for burglary because he believed that the bookie owed him the money.
Explanation:
Gambling can turn out sour sometimes, especially when results come out controversial. Although the defendant is not supposed to break into someone's home but according to the common law burglary he has some defense to make for himself which is he believed that the bookie owed him the money that's what he based his action for. The definition of common law burglary requires that the defendant break into the dwelling place with the intent to commit a felony. He would claim he didn't destroy any item or take more than what He was owed but just stocked to taking the money he was owed.
still finding some answer in this question
Can recognize themselves in a mirror.
Answer:
True
Explanation:
This is the case of exposing the trade secret of a business. The word "may" has significant impact here as the court may or may not hold Mort liable(depending on the circumstances) since the trade secret isn't expressly protected by Southern Bar-B-Q albeit implied that an employee doesn't divulge the trade secret of the business which could bring damages to it.
the bottum of the earth you can see that they have s then look at equater and that is the south of the equater
