Because they have been stuck in a caravan??!!!
Answer:
d. Feiner v. New York
Explanation:
In the case of <u>Feiner v. New York</u>, police actions were supported by the Supreme Court in their attempt to keep peace after a threat was made on the individual exercising his right to freedom of speech.
Answer:
De-intensification
Explanation:
In simple words, de-intensification can be understood as the emotional display rule under which the individual subject to extreme emotions holds himself or herself back to not look weak or awkward in any way. This rule is applied to control emotions in extreme case like happiness while getting married or getting angry while someone is yelling at you etc.
Answer:
In the understanding of this court case, where the plaintiff (L.M.) filed a lawsuit against Pacheco on sexual abuse, the court ruled that the perpetration of the abhorrent act committed did not have to do with Pacheco´s ´´scope of employment´´ as the act happened outside the boundaries of the church and not within his working hours. However, if the plaintiff were to argue that in fact this conduct happened within the scope of employment, she would have to explain and convince that Pacheco was indeed responsible as it is a Pastor's duty and responsibility to guide and counsel at all hours, and not just limited to his church´s hours. A pastor is a figure of responsibility as a visible head for a community, not to mention that in some churches, a pastor is also a legal representative.
Employers should be held liable for the acts of their employees whenever there is a failure to supervise employees or some kind of misdemeanor is perpetrated within the employer´s work facilities or influential premises. These points of view however, are not stated by a lawyer/judicially, these are my personal observations after having researched on the case.
