A
Ajdhvsheamkabwbshsbevevev
Answer:
the others are already answered
Explanation:
For general intent, the prosecution need only prove that the defendant intended to do the act in question, whereas proving specific intent would require the prosecution to prove that the defendant intended to bring about a specific consequence through his or her actions, or that he or she perform the action
I think yes but I would look it up
1)They are very reliable because they are almost always accurate.All science in the courtroom has to be verified in order to be used in the court to prove that their tests are accurate and reliable and can be used as an evidence in court. Reliability is measured by how much your machines have been validated ,if a forensic scientist in a court say the evidence is true but did not have a proper reliability , than people can question how true this test can actually be. Hard science is consisted of chemistry,biology and physics are the most reliable evidence.
2)The reliability of the analytical science in the courtroom is growing. This is because of the fact that analytical science involves comparison between the characteristics and features of the suspected specimens with those obtained from the criminals or victims. The analytical science plays an important role in proving a fact that a crime has been committed, the place of crime and establishing the identity of the culprit.
HOPE THIS HELPS..
