Answer from Chapter 5 Civil Law and Procedure
liability for statements made during the actual trial or hearing. Similarly, liability for defamatory statements about public officials or prominent personalities does not exist unless the statements were made with malice. That means the statement when issued was known to be false or was made with a reckless disregard for its probable falsehood. Invasion of Privacy People are entitled to keep personal matters private. This is the right to privacy. Congress has stated that the right of privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the Constitution of the United States. Invasion of privacy is a tort defined as the uninvited intrusion into an individual s personal relationships and activities in a way likely to cause shame or mental suffering in an ordinary person. An invasion of privacy also can result from unnecessary publicity regarding personal matters. So, unlike the law regarding the tort of defamation, publication of even a true statement about someone may be an invasion of privacy. This is because, as the U.S. Supreme Court put it, you should be protected when you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus, two-way mirrors result of the slanderous remark. Exceptions to this occur in cases where the oral statements are to the effect that the plaintiff committed a serious crime, has a loathsome disease, or injures someone in his or her profession or business. In libel cases, you are presumed to have suffered a loss, and so these damages do not have to be shown to the court. Exceptions are made to the law of defamation in order to encourage open discussion of issues of public concern. For example, legislators statements, even those made with malice, are immune from liability if made during legislative meetings. Judges, lawyers, jurors, witnesses, and other parties in judicial proceedings are also immune from What are some situations related to the right to privacy that affect your life? BLEND IMAGES 5-2 Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict Liability 87
Answer:
The difference is that Justification is a social Defense and a Excuse Defense is a mental disorder or something physical wrong with them
Explanation:
Excuse defence is when the defendant admits to committing a criminal act but believes that he or she cannot be held responsible because there was no criminal intent. Excuse defences that are used in courts today are; Age, Mental Disorder, Automatism, Mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law.
Justification is a defense in a criminal case, by which a defendant who committed the crime as defined, claims they did no wrong, because committing the crime advanced some social interest or vindicated a right of such importance that it outweighs the wrongfulness of the crime.
Answer:
Voting is a fair way to choose leaders. Voting usually takes a while, but it is a better way to know what the representative plans to do when he/she has a certain role in government.
Explanation:
Answer:
Archie was founded in 1939
Explanation: