Answer:
Carbon,hydrogen,oxygen
Explanation:sorry if i came late
-6y + 11x = -36....multiply by 4
-4y + 7x = -24....multiply by -6
-----------------
-24y + 44x = - 144 (result of multiplying by 4)
24y - 42x = 144 (result of multiplying by -6)
----------------add
2x = 0
x = 0
-4y + 7x = -24
-4y + 7(0) = -24
-4y = -24
y = -24/-4
y = 6
solution is (0,6)
The word <em>actress</em> means <em>actriz</em> in Spanish.
Note - The statement of this questions has typing mistakes, correct form is described below:
<em>What does the underlined word mean in the following sentence? La </em><u><em>actriz</em></u><em> está repitiendo las palabras. </em><em>(i)</em><em> coach, </em><em>(ii)</em><em> baker, </em><em>(iii)</em><em> actress, </em><em>(iv)</em><em> actor.</em>
<em />
In this question we must look up for the English translation of the underlined word. According to an English-Spanish dictionary, we have the following equivalencies:
Coach - Árbitro, guía.
Baker - Repostero.
Actress - Actriz.
Actor - Actor.
Therefore, the word <em>actress</em> means <em>actriz</em> in Spanish.
We kindly invite to check this question on sentences in Spanish: brainly.com/question/12516741
Answer: D. A track system was temporarily placed on each floor
Explanation: right on edg2021
The testimony regarding the man’s conduct during the three prior arrests is:
- The reason for this is that the prior events serve as impermissible character evidence.
<h3>What is irrelevant evidence?</h3>
Irrelevant evidence is the type of evidence that does not apply to the issue at hand and can cause a distortion of the facts.
In the case of the police officer in question, the evidence that he wants to present will cause confusion about the issues and possibly mislead the jury.
Learn more about irrelevant evidence here:
brainly.com/question/1865742
#SPJ1
Complete question:
A man has sued a police officer, alleging that the officer violated the man's civil rights by using excessive force while arresting him. At trial, the officer admits to having hit the man in the head with the butt of his gun but contends that the force was necessary because the man was resisting arrest. In support of his contention, the officer seeks to introduce evidence that the man had resisted arrest on three prior occasions during the last 10 years.
Is this testimony regarding the man’s conduct during the three prior arrests admissible?
