for purposes of insanity statutes, mental diseases do not include

Forensic interviews are especially important in child abuse cases because it enable the acquisition of factual information and evidence relating to those cases.

To ensure that facts are gathered in a way that can be proven in court, forensic interviews are carefully controlled: the interviewer's utterances and body language must be neutral, alternative explanations for a child's assertions are thoroughly explored, and the results of the interview are substantiated in a way that can be proven in court.

The purpose of a forensic interview is to get a statement from a kid in a way that is objective, developmental, and legally acceptable.

Child welfare officials frequently conduct these interviews in the privacy of their automobiles or vacant classrooms. These "improved" settings, while convenient, may not be perfect.

Because a person's capacity to recall past events is often impacted by his or her environment, best practice in forensic interviewing—even if it occurs "in the field"—entails establishing a neutral, comforting, and child-friendly site prior to the interview.

Learn more about Forensic Interviews:
https://brainly.com/question/15213328
#SPJ1

According to the law of effect: An activity that is taken to produce a result is referred to as an instrumental action. An instrumental action is anything you do, such as pulling a handle to get a snack or getting on a bus to get home.

According to Edward L. Thorndike's Law of Effect, behavioural reactions (R) that were most closely followed by a positive outcome were most likely to build patterns and recur in response to the same stimulus (S). Unmediated describes this fundamental S-R design. The reaction is seen as mediated if an individual organism (O) modifies the stimulus in any manner, such as by considering a response. The S-O-R theories of behaviour are frequently used to describe social interaction between people or groups.

In his PhD dissertation, Animal Intelligence, which was released in 1911, he first put out his two behavioural principles, the rule of effect and the law of exercise. He believed that adaptive changes in animal behaviour were comparable to learning in humans and proposed that by using the two principles, behavioural relationships (connections) could be anticipated. According to the law of effect, behavioural reactions that were most closely followed by a satisfactory outcome had the most likelihood of developing into established patterns and happening again in response to the same stimuli. According to the rule of exercise, behaviour is more firmly formed when stimulus and response are connected often.

To know more about law of effect, visit:

https://brainly.com/question/15465583

#SPJ4

Answer:

Sorry I don’t understand your cuestión

Explanation:

The hierarchical nature of the court system allows for higher courts to review and correct decisions made by lower courts. The correct option is 3.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) permits taxpayers to claim as an itemized deduction on their tax returns the interest paid on acquisition debt secured by a personal residence. The judicial system is referred to as having a hierarchical structure because higher courts have the authority to review and reverse decisions made by lower courts. The court system is typically divided into a number of levels, each with its own jurisdiction and authority. This includes the United States.

This hierarchical structure offers a mechanism for resolving mistakes or injustices that may happen at lower levels of the system as well as helps to ensure consistency and fairness in the application of the law. Additionally, it enables the formation of legal precedent, which may aid in directing subsequent choices and guaranteeing that the law is applied consistently over time. The correct option is 3.

Learn more about court system at:

brainly.com/question/3689905

#SPJ4

The NIMS management characteristic of chain of command and unity of command means that from the highest levels of the organization all the way down to the lowest there is a distinct and unbroken line of authority.

Everyone in the organization is aware of their immediate supervisor and who they report to thanks to the chain of command. Each employee in the company only reports to one direct supervisor. according to the concept of unity of command.

This system aids in making quick, effective decisions while ensuring that everyone is working toward the same goals and objectives. For efficient communication, coordination and decision making during emergencies, a clear chain of command and unity of command are essential.

Learn more about unity of command at:

brainly.com/question/30641469

#SPJ1

The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides several legal protections to individuals. It is a fundamental right of every person to be protected from unjust and unlawful actions by the government. The amendment is composed of several clauses that protect the rights of the people.

The Fifth Amendment guarantees several legal protections, including freedom from self-incrimination, double jeopardy, due process of law, and eminent domain. The amendment also ensures that individuals receive just compensation for any property seized by the government.

However, the Fifth Amendment does not guarantee freedom from cruel and unusual punishment. This protection is actually provided by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive fines and bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Freedom from double jeopardy refers to the principle that a person cannot be tried for the same crime twice. This ensures that individuals are protected from harassment by the government and are not punished multiple times for the same offence. The Fifth Amendment also protects individuals from being compelled to testify against themselves. This is commonly known as the right to remain silent and allows individuals to avoid self-incrimination.

Finally, the Fifth Amendment guarantees that individuals receive just compensation when the government takes private property through eminent domain. This clause protects individuals from the government’s power to take private property for public use. In summary, the Fifth Amendment provides several legal protections to individuals, including freedom from self-incrimination, double jeopardy, due process of law, and eminent domain. However, it does not guarantee freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, which is provided by the Eighth Amendment.

To know more about United States Constitution visit:

https://brainly.com/question/14276258

#SPJ11

Answer:

Explanation:

Im not sure but im gonna say Zoidberg

awarded custody to the mother.

Explanation:

Answer:

Family court ruled that, the child is staying with a former schoolmate of the childs grandmother. The Appellate Division reversed, one Justice dissenting, and awarded custody to the mother.

Explanation:

So what happened was although the mother had not surrendered or abandoned the child and was not unfit, the grandmother still got the child and in the end the child ended up with his mom.

Preparedness. criminal career. research focuses on the trajectory of criminal offending, examining its onset, duration, and when it stops.

Being prepared can lessen worry, tension, and losses that accompany failures. groups, households, and individuals need to realize what to do inside the event of a fireplace and in which to seek shelter at some point of a effective storm.

Pressure theories kingdom that positive lines or stressors increase the chance of crime. these strains result in bad emotions, inclusive of frustration and anger. those emotions create strain for corrective motion, and crime is one possible response.

Learn more about Preparedness here

https://brainly.com/question/29549853

#SPJ4

Answer:

It is only accurate if the criminal is already in the police database.

Explanation:

The print is matched with a fingerprint that is already in the system.

No one disputes that fingerprinting is a valuable and generally reliable police tool, but despite more than a century of use, fingerprinting has never been scientifically validated. This is significant because of the criteria governing the admission of scientific evidence in the US courts. Latent fingerprints, which are collected from crime scenes, have been used as courtroom evidence for decades. ... But there is little certainty that a set of fingerprints can reliably point to the right person, according to the report.

A limited central government was introduced in the second draft of the Articles of Confederation in place of a robust one.

The Articles established a shaky central government and a loose confederation of independent states, giving state governments the majority of the authority. A stronger federal government was quickly realized to be necessary, which finally prompted the 1787 Constitutional Convention.

Clearly, the larger states would be favored over the smaller states in this initial design. The document was amended as a result of this anxiety. The amended Articles of Confederation allowed for equal representation of all states in the Congress.

To Know more about federal

https://brainly.com/question/8305583

#SPJ9

Answer:

limited central government

Answer:

Appellate courts review the procedures and decisions in the trial court to make sure that the proceedings were fair and that the proper law was applied correctly

Explanation:

The defense that requires a jury to divide up the proportion of negligence committed by the parties in terms of percentage is called "comparative negligence." Comparative negligence is a legal doctrine used to determine responsibility and damages in personal injury cases.

It is a defense used by the defendant, which asserts that the plaintiff was partially or wholly responsible for the damages suffered, and thus the defendant should only be held liable for the percentage of damages that they caused. Comparative negligence requires a jury to apportion liability between the plaintiff and defendant based on their respective degrees of fault.

The jury is asked to determine the percentage of negligence attributed to each party, and damages are awarded based on that percentage. In states that follow pure comparative negligence, a plaintiff can still recover damages even if they were found to be 99% at fault, but their damages will be reduced by their percentage of fault.

Learn more about doctrine

https://brainly.com/question/30613074

#SPJ11

Witnessing is the act of bearing testimony to an event, situation, or fact. It can refer to a legal act of giving evidence in a court of law.

But it can also refer to personal experiences, such as witnessing a natural disaster or historic event. Witnessing can also mean observing and bearing witness to the suffering of others, and taking a stand against it. In a religious context, witnessing refers to sharing one's faith and experiences with others, often with the intention of converting them to the same belief. Regardless of the context, witnessing is an important aspect of human life that helps us understand and make sense of our experiences and the world around us.

Learn more about Witnessing :

https://brainly.com/question/15649802

#SPJ4

Answer:

Its "PI" first of all and the sum of pi is approximately equal to 3.14159 or π over 4. It has been represented by the Greek letter "π" since the mid-18th century, and is spelled out as "pi".

Explanation:

Hope that helped you

Give the other person brainliest

The fact that justice marshall was a federalist influenced his ruling in the McCulloch case is written below:

Federalists like a strong central government. This ruling strengthened the central government. He wanted more power in the federal government.

Federalism is a device of government wherein the identical territory is managed by using two ranges of presidency. usually, an overarching countrywide government is answerable for broader governance of larger territorial areas, whilst the smaller subdivisions, states, and towns govern the issues of neighborhood problems.

An example of a Federalist is the political party that believed in a vital controlling government and advocacy a centralized machine of government. noun. 19. 6. system of country-wide government in which strength is split among a central authority and a number of regions with delimited self-governing authority.

Learn more about Federalist here: https://brainly.com/question/267094

#SPJ4

Answer:

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided several cases involving the First Amendment rights of public school students, but the most often cited are Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986) and Hazelwood School District v.

Answer:

What he meant was that we are a nation of laws that means we have laws to fallow not men. This was keeping from people Ruling and being powerful.

Explanation:

Zoning laws, which restrict certain land uses to specific areas, may be justified in addressing adverse externalities since they can limit locations of businesses that generate negative externalities.

Zoning laws typically define the areas that may be used for industrial, recreational, residential, or commercial purposes. An R-1 residential zone, for example, may permit only single-family residential properties rather than duplexes or apartment buildings. A C-1 commercial zone, on the other hand, may be zoned to allow only certain industrial or commercial uses in one territory while allowing a mix of accommodation and businesses in another.

To learn more about zoning laws: brainly.com/question/2494528

#SPJ4

The case that ruled that a university's admission criteria, which used race as a definite basis for an admission decision, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is "Regents of the University of California v. Bakke" (1978).

In this landmark case, the Supreme Court addressed affirmative action in higher education admissions. Allan Bakke, a white applicant, challenged the University of California, Davis' affirmative action program, which set aside a specific number of seats for minority applicants. The Court ruled that while the use of race as a factor in admissions was permissible to promote diversity, rigid quotas based solely on race were unconstitutional.

The decision in Bakke established that while race could be considered as one of many factors in admissions decisions, strict racial quotas violated the Equal Protection Clause. The ruling had a significant impact on affirmative action policies and shaped subsequent cases related to race-conscious admissions in educational institutions.

To learn more about California v. Bakke, click here:

https://brainly.com/question/30779760

#SPJ11

when I was not having my practice n.b and I explained my teacher but she didn't

then I call my mother and she told the same reason to her

Answer:

D.) Gabriel Tarde

Explanation:

He was a criminologist and social psychologist

Answer:

It is C, Hans Eysenck.

Explanation:

I put Gabriel Tarde and got it wrong. So person above me is wrong.

The  conflict that would most  likely be settled by law rather than ethics is: d. A driver damages another car in a grocery store parking lot.

Conflict can be defined as a form of disagreement that occur between two or more people. Conflict  is what led to the development of conflict resolution as conflict resolution help to settle the disagreement the people that were involved in a conflict had .

The case that may be  settle by the court of law is when a person damage or  destroy another person property in which the person that commit the damage refuse to repair the damage, the owner of the property can sue the person in the law of court for damage  which will be settle by the jury and   if found guilty the person must pay for the damage.

Therefore the correct option is D.

Learn more about conflict here: https://brainly.com/question/25668660

#SPJ1

Answer:

A driver damages another car in a grocery store parking lot.

Explanation:

Got this right on the quiz! Although another choice might also be settled by law, this one is MOST LIKELY to be settled using law.

A homicide committed by misadventure or accident would be: excusable. The correct option is B

A homicide committed by misadventure or accident refers to an unintentional killing that occurs due to a lawful act conducted without any intention to harm. It is not considered a criminal act because there is no intent to cause harm or commit a crime. Therefore, it falls under the category of excusable homicide.

Excusable homicide is different from the other options provided:

a. Justifiable homicide refers to a killing that is legally justified, such as in self-defense or to protect others.

c. Criminal homicide is the act of unlawfully causing the death of another person, which can be either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances.

d. Felonious homicide is a category of criminal homicide that involves a death occurring during the commission of a felony, such as a robbery or kidnapping.

In summary, a homicide committed by misadventure or accident is classified as excusable because it involves an unintentional killing without any intention to harm or commit a crime.

To know more about homicide, refer here:

https://brainly.com/question/30638493#

#SPJ11

Complete question:

A homicide committed by misadventure or accident would be

a. justifiable

b. excusable

c. criminal

d. felonious

The job of U.S. attorneys is that B. They are the chief federal law enforcement officers for their judicial districts.

U.S. attorneys in America are tasked with being the federal officials that prosecute federal crimes in their districts.

This means that they are condisered to be federal law enforcement officers in their judicial districts.

Find out more on U.S. Attorneys at https://brainly.com/question/1597501.

#SPJ1

Answer:

Indictment.

Explanation:

To complete a notarization, it is enough for a notary public to place a stamp on the record and signature ----- False

A notary public, a licensed public officer who acts as an impartial witness to the signing of documents and determines the authenticity of the signatures, certifies a notarized letter or document. To verify the signature on your letter or legal document, you need the seal and signature of a notary public.

A notarial certificate is a written statement that the notary public signs and seals to confirm the facts of a notarial act. A notary's most common duties as a notary include administering oaths and accepting acknowledgments.

When a document has a notary seal on it, the court knows that the signatures are genuine and not fake because the notary seal is there to verify this.

Learn more about notarizing document :

brainly.com/question/14477099

#SPJ1