There are several reasons why Ted Bundy deserved the death penalty. He killed a lot of people
<h3>Reasons why the death penalty was an
adequate punishment for Ted Bundy:</h3>
- He killed a lot of people in the society.
- He was a predator.
- He raped people.
- He was a kidnapper
- He had no mercy for the people he attacked.
- He was jailed, he escaped from Jail and still killed again.
- If granted parole in years later, someone like him would still atatck innocents again.
- It was the good that the society got rid of him. People like him would always be a danger to other good people.
- The people that he killed did not deserve to die also. He was only made to tast his own medicine.
Read more on the death penalty here: brainly.com/question/509558
Answer:
The man will be responsible for driving over a child of course. For he wasn’t supposed to drive and it was his responsibility to take care of himself before driving. And even if it was his first year he would still be accused as a criminal for when driving, everybody expects you to take your time to drive and be aware.
Explanation: Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Answer:
C. Internet Service Providers are not prohibited from disclosing the content of email messages to 3rd parties
Explanation:
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) is a law. It prohibits tapping or capturing communication over wires. There are other state laws that cover legalities about wiretapping.
Consent is required to capture electronic communication. In some states dual consent is required while in others single consent is sufficient.
Dual consent means both of the communicating parties must agree, while single consent means that one one party should agree. Electronic Communication Act was an amendment to the Title Third of Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (1968).
Answer:
B. Cases individual citizens are most likely to be involved in are usually tried in federal courts.
Answer:
in both cases the flyer was presented to the barber before the service was provided.
a) no, because Karl was informed about the mistake and the real price and could then still have decided to take his business elsewhere. but if he then agreed to still have the service performed under the now updated conditions, then that is what the "contract" is basing on.
he has no grounds to claim the other price afterwards.
b) no, because the service provider saw the flyer information, did not object to or correct the information right away, but performed the service instead. now the "contract" is based on that agreement based on the conditions of the flyer.
