Ruled by one ruler. King or Queen.
I don't have a regional answer but I am confidently sure that Saudi Arabia and China is among the countries that are the top dogs of producing oil. But Saudi Arabia beats China though.
Explanation:
The witness's testimony is inadmissible.
Under Federal Rule 804(b)(1), the testimony of a witness who is unavailable, given at another hearing, is admissible in a subsequent trial if there is sufficient similarity of parties and issues so that the opportunity to develop testimony or cross-examination at the prior hearing was meaningful.
The former testimony is admissible upon any trial of the same subject matter. The party against whom the testimony is offered or, in civil cases, the party's predecessor in interest must have been a party in the former action. "Predecessor in interest" includes one in a privity relationship with the party, such as grantor-grantee, testator-executor, life tenant-remainder man, and joint tenants.
These requirements are intended to ensure that the party against whom the testimony is offered (or a predecessor in interest in a civil case) had an adequate opportunity and motive to cross-examine the witness.
In the civil suit here at issue, the survivors of the victim were not parties to the criminal case, nor were they in privity with any such party. (The parties to that case were the defendant and the government.) These survivors, who are the plaintiffs in the instant litigation, are the parties against whom the testimony of the witness is being offered. Because they were not parties to the action in which the witness testified, they had no opportunity to cross-examine him. Even if the government had a similar motive to cross-examine the witness as do the plaintiffs in the current action, that is not sufficient to make the government a predecessor in interest to the plaintiffs. Consequently, the testimony of the witness does not come within the former testimony exception to the hearsay rule, and the testimony is inadmissible hearsay.
A victim and his former business.
Technology transform agriculture of Georgia into new frontiers and new rise due to improvement of their means of life. It increase the population growth of Georgia into an unprecedented scale that surpasses a lot of other regions and states. Because of technology the way the agriculture was processed improved thus making it more efficient.
<em>Based on the test</em> which Salma took when she was 28 years old and the <em>same test was taken</em> forty years later, her score would have most likely remained the same in the <em>items that required her to</em>:
According to the given question, we are asked to state the terms which would have remained the same for Salma in the same test which she took 40 years later and which aspect was likely to remain the same.
As a result of this, we can see that because she took the test when <em>she was 28 years old </em>when her <em>brain powers</em> were still very much active, her responses would <em>most likely remain the same 40 years later</em> based on the definition of certain words
Read more about intelligence test here:
brainly.com/question/3909228
