Answer:
No, because local law enforcement has other priorities especially to protect the people of their community, by adding extra task to local law enforcement would obstruct how they respond to local issues and apply more stress that they already have.
Answer:
The exclusionary rule prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. The decision in Mapp v. Ohio established that the exclusionary rule applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The decision in Miranda v. Arizona established that the exclusionary rule applies to improperly elicited self-incriminatory statements gathered in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and to evidence gained in situations where the government violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. However, the rule does not apply in civil cases, including deportation hearings. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza.
Answer:
b. malpractice
Explanation:
Malpractice, or professional negligence, refers to a case of incompetence on the part of a professional. A case of malpractice usually occurs when a client feels that a professional breached his or her duty of care. Some of the professionals that can be accused of malpractice are medical professionals, lawyers, accountants, stockbrokers and architects.
Answer:
because the parking lot owner is the one responsible if any car is stolen
