0
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
The Supreme Court has a greater obligation to protect the rights of victims than those of criminals?
Neither. They have an obligation to uphold the law. The chips fall where they may.Answer: The Supreme Court, as does every other branch of the United States government, has an absolute responsibility to protect the rights of individuals. This is the Supreme Law of the Land and the only purpose of this government to begin with. If the Supreme Court is to uphold the law then they must begin by upholding an individuals rights. If a person has been accused of abrogating or derogating the rights of someone else, i.e. murder, then that person accused of such crime is entitled a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. This means there must be sufficient enough evidence to bring charges against this individual to begin with and once those charges have been made there is a process of trial that must be done in a speedy manner and the burden of proving guilt is placed upon the prosecution. If the prosecution is not able to effectively establish guilt, and a jury or judge lets the accused go, this is because of the law. The law has insisted the rights of that individual be respected. This does not discount the rights of the victim who has surely had their rights abrogated and derogated, but assuming it was murder, that victim can only rely upon the government sworn to uphold the law to effectively investigate this murder to effectively establish guilt upon that person they are investigating and to effectively prove this guilt in a court of law. That the government is held to this standard does not elevate the rights of a criminal over the rights of a victim. It holds as paramount the rights of all.
What did the concept of protected rights begin with?
The concept of protected rights, such as habeas corpus (the right to a fair and speedy trial) and the rule of law (no one is above the law) began with the signing of the Magna Carta by King John in 1215
When did the Nuemberg trials begin?
The Nuremberg War trials began on November 20, 1945. Twenty four individuals were accused of many violations including crimes against humanity.
Who pays the financial advisers?
I would say that the person or company who hired the financial advisors would be responsible for paying for them. Any decent financial advisor will have a contract to be signed before they begin work, and in it the fees should be clearly spelled out.
Was the preamble written to begin or end the constitution?
To begin it. Here's an easy way to remember that: "pre" means "before".
A word that begin with the letter s used to describe velocity?
speedy
How are people in real life accused of crimes?
Unsure what is being asked. Anyone can be "accused" of a crime. Usually it will be the police that will first contact you and begin asking you questions about a certain incident or offense. It is in the way that you are handled after being arrested that becomes the subject of statute law and court decisions, and rulings.
In what year did the TV series Accused begin?
1958
What is a sentence using the word recriminations?
The crisis was over, but as they began to think about who was to blame, the recriminations would begin.
How many days after the court receives the letter for a speedy trial what is the time limit?
The matter of speedy trial should have been addressed at either your preliminary hearing or your bail hearing. When so-called "speedy" trial is requested, the trial should normally begin within a 90 day timeframe.
How long before a state trial must begin?
Their really isn't an exact standard. However, you must have a fair and speedy trial
What is an order telling police to bring an arrested person to court?
To bring the arrestee DIRECTLY "to court": A bench warrant. To simply arrest an individual on a charge and begin the judicial process: An arrest warrant
How did the way in which those accused of crimes begin to improve in the 12th century?
Those accused of crimes went to a nationwide system of royal courts where punishments and decisions were made by the common law.
How did the way in which accused of crimes were treated begin to improve in the 12th century?
Those accused of crimes went to a nationwide system of royal courts where punishments and decisions were made by the common law.
How did the way in which those accused of crimes were treated begin to improve in the 12th century?
Those accused of crimes went to a nationwide system of royal courts where punishments and decisions were made by the common law.
How did the way in those accused of crime were treated begin to Improve in the 12th century?
Those accused of crimes went to a nationwide system of royal courts where punishments and decisions were made by the common law.
How did the ways in which those accused of crimes were treated begin to improve in the 12th century?
Those accused of crimes went to a nationwide system of royal courts where punishments and decisions were made by the common law.
