Categories
Assignment Help

How have your education, experiences and/or people skills prepared you to deal with the demands of protective services while working for criminal justice field?

[ad_1]

Answered by answersmine AT 22/10/2019 – 03:01 AM

My education taught me the necessary laws to defend or oppose a criminal when needed to. My experiences taught me the rules of life, to uphold ones’ values in spite of he harshness of the reality. My people skills help me interact with people and how to deal with them if they have something going on with their lives.

Post your answer

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

6. What is a major corporation that includes a number of smaller companies in unrelated industries? a consumer mandate a franchise a conglomerate none of the above 7. What was “white flight”? middle-class white Americans leaving the cities for the suburbs rural poor moving to the cities middle-class white Americans leaving the suburbs for the cities urban poor moving to the country 8. In this case, the Supreme Court required criminal courts to provide free legal counsel to those who could not afford it. Gideon v. Wainwright Miranda v. Arizona Baker v. Carr Brown v. Board of Education 9. In 1896, in _______, the Supreme Court ruled that a Louisiana law requiring “separate but equal” public accommodations was constitutional. Sweatt v. Painter Plessy v. Ferguson Morgan v. Virginia Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka 10. Who gave the “I Have a Dream” speech during the march on Washington? A. Philip Randolph Robert Moses Martin Luther King, Jr. Bayard Rustin

[ad_1]

Industrialization led to rising imperialism because 
1) show of power: As one makes new technology, they would either want to test it out or show the other nations that what they produce is ground-breaking and the best. Usually if it is military technology, you would want to test it out, and with the use of “show of force”, can have people groups submit to your country.
2) Better technology: As technology advances, it usually makes something easier. In the case of imperialism, better military advances meant that they could (once again) have other people submit to you
3) Better transportation: This meant that you could take multiple countries at once, and can prove that you’re country is great by having supplies shipped over long distances to keep your troops up. If in need of more troops, you could send more.

hope this helps

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

Without the reassurance of a handwritten ink signature, there is no obvious way to verify the authorship. Alternatively, imagine that a bank receives an e-mail from a client, which instructs that all the client’s funds should be transferred to a private numbered bank account in the Cayman Islands. Once again, without a handwritten signature, how does the bank know that the e-mail is really from the client? The e-mail could have been written by a criminal attempting to divert the money to his own Cayman Islands bank account. In order to develop trust on the Internet, it is essential that there is some form of reliable digital signature. –The Code Book, Simon Singh Write three to five sentences evaluating the author’s argument. In your response, identify and evaluate the claim and whether the evidence supports the reason and the claim.

[ad_1]

Hey there!

Correct answer is D. Comma or Period Inside Rule

A. Question mark or exclamation point inside: those are not really necessary.

B. Colon or semicolon: not, a semicolon would divide the whole sentence and it would be shorten; a colon would work but after requested, when there is already a comma.

C. Question mark or Exclamation Point Outside Rule: would not work, becase it is an very polite and affirmative sentence.

D: A comma or period inside rule: actually, just a comma would work. Please, Cooper’s dad requested, go… Cooper’s dad requested must be in between commas as it is a vocative.

Hope this helps

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

What protects humanitarian aid workers during times of war? 1. Universal Declaration of human rights 2. International Criminal court 3. The world Health Organization 4. The Geneva Convention

[ad_1]

1. We are all free and equal. We are all born free. We all have our own thoughts and ideas. We should all be treated in the same way.

2. Don’t discriminate. These rights belong to everybody, whatever our differences.

3. The right to life. We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety.

4. No slavery – past, and present. Nobody has any right to make us a slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.

5. No Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.

6. We all have the same right to use the law. I am a person just like you!

7. We are all protected by the law. The law is the same for everyone. It must treat us all fairly.

8. Fair treatment by fair courts. We can all ask for the law to help us when we are not treated fairly.

9. No unfair detainment. Nobody has the right to put us in prison without a good reason and keep us there or to send us away from our country.

10. The right to trial. If we are put on trial this should be in public. The people who try us should not let anyone tell them what to do.

11. Innocent until proven guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show it is not true.

12. The right to privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name. Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters or bother us or our family without a good reason.

13. Freedom to move. We all have the right to go where we want in our own country and to travel as we wish.

14. The right to asylum. If we are frightened of being badly treated in our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be safe.

15. The right to a nationality. We all have the right to belong to a country.

16. Marriage and family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and have a family if they want to. Men and women have the same rights when they are married, and when they are separated.

17. Your own things. Everyone has the right to own things or share them. Nobody should take our things from us without a good reason.

18. Freedom of thought. We all have the right to believe in what we want to believe, to have a religion, or to change it if we want.

19. Free to say what you want. We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people.

20. Meet where you like. We all have the right to meet our friends and to work together in peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a group if we don’t want to.

21. The right to democracy. We all have the right to take part in the government of our country. Every grown-up should be allowed to choose their own leaders.

22. The right to social security. We all have the right to affordable housing, medicine, education, and child care, enough money to live on and medical help if we are ill or old.

23. Workers’ rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to a fair wage for their work, and to join a trade union.

24. The right to play. We all have the right to rest from work and to relax.

25. A bed and some food. We all have the right to a good life. Mothers and children, people who are old, unemployed or disabled, and all people have the right to be cared for.

26. The right to education. Education is a right. Primary school should be free. We should learn about the United Nations and how to get on with others. Our parents can choose what we learn.

27. Culture and copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects one’s own artistic creations and writings; others cannot make copies without permission. We all have the right to our own way of life and to enjoy the good things that “art,” science and learning bring.

28. A free and fair world. There must be proper order so we can all enjoy rights and freedoms in our own country and all over the world.

29. Our responsibilities. We have a duty to other people, and we should protect their rights and freedoms.

30. Nobody can take away these rights and freedoms from us.

I’m unsure of what you were asking for specifically.

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

Which of the following would be an example of a criminal case? A. One that involves a plaintiff who commits a crime B.One that involves a defendant accused of committing a crime C. One that involves a dispute between two parties D. One that involves a dispute between a private citizen and the government

[ad_1]

The Songhai leader who left a
legacy through the reforms in his empire was Muhammad I Askia or Muhammad Ture.
Under his governance, he began organizing his land by setting up regions which
were under the leadership of governors together with their armies under the
ruling of a general and an admiral.  He
also began setting departments and offices for finance, justice, interior, agriculture,
etc. He indeed strengthened the administrative system of what his predecessor
had left unorganized.  After a lot of
quests and changes in his governance, he was able to expand and strengthened
his empire. In 1528, he was defeated and overthrown by his son, Askia Musa. 

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

A Dolls House Multiple Choice QuestionsQUESTION 1 Mrs. Linde broke off her relationship with Krogstad because A. Krogstad was a criminal. B. her parents disapproved of the relationship. C. Krogstad could not support Mrs. Linde’s mother and brothers. D. Mrs. Linde was married at the time. 3 points QUESTION 2 Mrs. Linde’s proposal to Krogstad is that Mrs. Linde and Krogstad A. leave for America. B. ask Nora for help. C. marry. D. keep their relationship a secret from Nora. QUESTION 3 When Torvald reads Krogstad’s letter, Nora plans to A. commit suicide. B. beg for forgiveness. C. deny that she ever borrowed the money. D. run away with Dr. Rank. QUESTION 4 When Torvald reads the letter from Krogstad, his reaction is that Nora A. has done nothing to be ashamed of. B. is a criminal and a liar. C. has done the only thing she could under the circumstances. D. is still a good wife and mother. QUESTION 5 After reading Krogstad’s first letter, Torvald’s plan is to A. pretend that nothing has happened. B. throw Nora out of the house. C. send Nora to live with Dr. Rank. D. continue to live with Nora for the sake of appearance. QUESTION 6 One type of animal that Torvald uses to describe Nora is a A. bear. B. bee. C. bird. D. cat. QUESTION 7 The title A Doll House probably comes from the fact that A. Nora played with dolls as a child. B. Nora buys doll houses for her little girl. C. Nora has always waited on her husband and her father. D. Nora’s husband treats her like a pretty doll. QUESTION 8 Nora really believed that when Torvald read Krogstad’s letter he would A. throw her out of the house. B. promote Krogstad at the bank. C. fire Krogstad immediately. D. take the blame himself. QUESTION 9 When Torvald wants to make up to Nora, Nora’s plan is to A. leave the house and leave the children with Torvald. B. stay with her husband. C. leave the house but take her children with her. D. run away with Dr. Rank. QUESTION 10 At the end of the play, Nora speaks of a miracle that will not happen. The miracle she refers to is A. Torvald making peace with Krogstad. B. Torvald and Nora both changing so much that they could have a real marriage. C. Torvald and Nora learning to be good parents to their children. D. Torvald forgiving her.

[ad_1]

Hey there!

Correct answer is D. Comma or Period Inside Rule

A. Question mark or exclamation point inside: those are not really necessary.

B. Colon or semicolon: not, a semicolon would divide the whole sentence and it would be shorten; a colon would work but after requested, when there is already a comma.

C. Question mark or Exclamation Point Outside Rule: would not work, becase it is an very polite and affirmative sentence.

D: A comma or period inside rule: actually, just a comma would work. Please, Cooper’s dad requested, go… Cooper’s dad requested must be in between commas as it is a vocative.

Hope this helps

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

Which statement describes one of the political consequences of the Watergate scandal? (4 points) It reversed the gains made by Nixon’s Detente policy toward China. It resulted in a significant expansion of protections for criminal defendants’ rights. It enabled Congress to take control of Vietnam War policy away from the president. It represented a major setback for the federal government due to public suspicion.

[ad_1]

The Reformation actually started after Columbus’s landing in North America. 

Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 was forced on Spain and Portugal by the Pope. The Pope basically said that all lands in the New World belonged to Spain and all new non-Christian lands in the Eastern Hemisphere belong to Portugal. No other Catholic countries can do anything in those areas without the approval of the owner. 

The pope basically drew two lines on the globe setting the border. The western line started at the north pole cut half way through Greenland and ended at the south pole. The new world was everything to the west. Problem is that it ran through a chunk of Brazil which is why Brazil is an ex-Portuguese colony. 

The Eastern line starts at the North Pole runs through siberia, through the pacific just west of Japan, and cuts Australia in half. Of course, Australia hadn’t been discovered yet. Everything to the the east of this line is the new world. 

Obviously, this treaty didn’t hold up well, but the reformation gave the protestant countries an excuse to explore the new world since they didn’t have to take orders from the Pope. Even so, France, a catholic country, ignored it too. 

Really, the only country that was effected by the reformation in the exploration of the Americas was England. All the other countries, changed their religion once and then went to war with the nearest catholic country. Sweden became Lutheran and stayed that way. The Dutch Republic became Calvinists and stayed that way. 

England kept switching. First it was Catholic. Then, Henry VIII made it protestant. Then, Henry’s daughter Mary I made it catholic again. Henry’s other daughter Elizabeth I (with the two hit movies) made it Protestant again. 

Years latter, Oliver Cromwell over through the monarchy, executed the King Charles I, and established a Protestant fundamentalist religious military dictatorship. He outlawed drinking,smoking, gambling, theater, dirty books, sports, prostitution, and anything generally fun. He would have made Saudi Arabia proud. Basically, all you could do is work, pray, and die. Sex was allowed for creating children, but you couldn’t enjoy it. 

When Cromwell died, the people of England said enough was enough and brought back the King. Charles II kicked out the fundamentalists and brought back drinking, smoking, gambling, dirty books, sports, prostitution, and having fun during sex. Incidentally, those were also all his hobbies. 

This brings us to the famous Pilgrims. They were part of Cromwell’s crowd. They kept agitating a return to the no-fun policy. They annoyed everybody. They weren’t persecuted for practicing their religion, they were persecuted because they kept trying to force their religion on everyone else. Sort of like Southern Baptists. 

Charles II was the most easy going monarch in British history. Do realize how annoying you have to be to get him to throw you out. 

Charles’s brother James II was obsessed with turning Great Britain catholic again. After four years of trying, they kicked him and his followers out. 

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

In the United States, the annual cost of teen pregnancies: has little effect on the economy. has little effect on the criminal justice system. has significant impact on lost tax revenues and public assistance.

[ad_1]

The goal of the public health system is to maintain and strengthen the health and well-being of people.

This system comprises of all public, voluntary and private organizations that contribute to achieving this goal.Implement laws and regulations that secure health and ensure safety.  Some of the function of the public health is to ensure qualified public and personal health care staff., to develop plans and policies, to identify and investigate health issues and health hazards in the people…

According this definition and explanation, disease reporting is responsibility of public health. Correct answer: D Disease reporting is one way of ensuring and maintaining general public health.

All other options are personal responsibilities.

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

How many sides are there in a criminal court case? A:There is one side: the defendant’s. B:There are two sides: the defendant’s and the plaintiff’s. C:There are three sides: the defendant’s, the plaintiff’s, and the judge’s. D:There are four sides: the defendant’s, the plaintiff’s, the judge’s, and the jurors’.

[ad_1]

The three ways in which the invention of the Gutenberg press affected Europe were:

A. Literacy rates increased as books became more accessible.

C. Printers could mass-produce books quickly.

D. Books became less expensive to buy.

The Gutenberg press allowed books to be printed and therefore each book did not needed to be handwritten. This allowed books to be mass-produced and the cost and time of producing a book was reduced significantly. Therefore, books were cheaper and more accessible to people. Before the Gutenberg press only the rich had access to having books, the literacy rates were low and the church had control over the society. One of the most important books to be printed was the Bible. The Gutenberg press was key to the Protestant Revolution. People could now read the Bible and interpret it on their own.

[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

Difference Between Criminal and Civil Law in Ontario Canada

[ad_1]

Number of Words: 1,523

Comparison between Criminal and Civil Law in Ontario Canada – Introduction

In particular, criminal law involves significant criminal crimes such as murder, robbery, assault and rape, whereas civil law contains actions linked to the lending and borrowing process, agreements, neighbor conflicts and weddings (Merryman & Pérez-Perdomo, 2007, p. 6; Wood, 2002, p. 255). While both criminal and civil cases involve an argument about the rights and responsibilities of the people involved in a case, there is still a lot of difference in principles, administration and procedures between criminal law and civil law.

          In this research, Ontario will compare and contrast the distinction between the values of civil and criminal court, administration, processes, and kinds of instances. As part of going through the main discussion, examples of cases that occurred in Ontario since 2005 will be provided in this paper.

Difference Between Criminal and Civil Law in Ontario Canada

Differences between the Principles, Administration and Proceedings of the Civil and Criminal Court in Ontario Canada

In principle, criminal law in Ontario includes acts which are proven to cause deliberate damage to another individual or assets of other persons, whereas civil law involves either conflicts between two persons or negligent acts which could result in damage to another individual (Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association, 2010 a). A good example of criminal law under the classification of burglary is the act of breaking into the home of another person with the intention to commit a felony (Lippman, 2010, p. 420). In line with this, the main purpose of criminal law is to protect the society’s peace and order (Sixth Sense, 2010).

Civil law aims to protect the interest of private individuals by upholding the rights of each person (Jenkins, 2011, p. 320; Sixth Sense, 2010). Unlike criminal legislation that includes causing deliberate damage to another individual, civil legislation includes arguing between two individuals or any type of negligence that may result in damage to another individual. These arguments can arise out of misunderstanding or disagreement over the ownership of land or buildings, dismissal of employee, bounced checks, or unresolved financial debts (FDIC, 2010).

Aside from simple family law cases such as divorce, division of conjugal properties, spousal and child support, parental responsibility for a child or the distribution of estates of deceased person; professional negligence and malpractice that could have resulted to physical injury or damages to another person is also categorized under civil court cases (Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association, 2010 a).

Since criminal offenses are committed against the safety and security of society, the State or Crown is responsible for investigating and prosecuting the criminal allegations against the victims. (Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association, 2010 a). As part of the investigating procedure for criminal cases, it is the local police who have the authority to gather concrete evidences that can be filed in the court. In court, the person authorized to present the criminal case against the suspect are the public prosecutors including the judges and juries (ibid). Since the suspect is found guilty of a felony, the suspect will be convicted of a felony and fined for years of imprisonment, fine, community sentence, or release.

Generally speaking, it is essential to gather numerous concrete evidence that an deliberate crime has been committed before any individual is convicted of a crime. The suspect hitting another individual can only be categorized as a criminal attack in the lack of strong evidence. Not unless the suspect was proven to have intentionally beaten up another person without a reasonable doubt, it is not possible to accuse the suspect of a criminal case (Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association, 2010 a).

In contrast to criminal law, the state has no role to play in the handling of civil cases except when the party is the government. Depending on the equilibrium of probabilities, it is the courts that can decide whether or not the defendant is responsible for a civil case, reject a civil case because of insufficient evidence or order the loser to pay the damages through monetary award (Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association, 2010 a). As part of the investigating procedure for civil cases, it is the parties involved and lawyers are responsible in gathering evidences which will be presented in the courts (ibid).

Forming the lower ties within the Canadian court system in Ontario, the Ontario Court of Justice and Superior Court of Justice make up the Court of Ontario. Specifically the Ontario Court of Justice is composed of 287 judges and 349 justices of the peace who were appointed to serve in the courts (Ontario Court of Justice, 2006 / 2007, p. 1). The Superior Court of Justice is solely responsible for hearing all jury trials and trials before a judge for a preliminary hearing of all civil and criminal and youth criminal instances (Ontario Court of Justice, 2006 / 2007, pp. 1 – 2).

Under Child and Family Services Act, the Family Court Branch has the exclusive jurisdiction in handling all other family law matters except for divorce, division of property, spousal support and child custody (Ontario Court of Justice, 2006 / 2007, p. 2). Family cases related to divorce, division of property, spousal support and child custody is being handled by the Family Court of the Superior Court of Justice.

It is the justices of peace of the Court who handles provincial offenses, bail hearings, and the issuance of search warrants whereas the judges of the court conduct trials for provincial offences, criminal and youth criminal justice bails, trails, and preliminary hearings, and family law cases except for divorce and the division of property (Ontario Court of Justice, 2010 a; Ontario Court of Justice, 2006 / 2007, p. 2). In order to prevent misjudgment, the Superior Court of Justice appeals to a judge of the Court of Justice of Ontario (Ontario Court of Justice, 2006 / 2007, p. 2). Composed of the Chief of Justice of Ontario, the Associate Chief Justice of Ontario and 21 other judges; the Ontario Court of Appeal who is in-charge of hearing civil and criminal appeals coming from Ontario Court of Justice and the Superior Court of Justice (Court of Appeal for Ontario, 2010b).

Types and Examples of Cases in Ontario

There are a lot of criminal and civil cases in Ontario. A good example of civil law is the case of R. v. Richards [2010 ONCA 728]. Jason Richards was found guilty of several offenses related to sexual assault, two assaults, forcible confinement, and two counts of failure to comply with courts recognizance after his girlfriend wanted to end their relationship. After receiving imprisonment for 7-1/2 years, he made an appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the grounds that was specified under Section 718.2© of the Criminal Code stating that “where consecutive sentences are imposed, the combined sentence should not be unduly long or harsh”. Eventually, his imprisonment was cut short to 5 years which includes the 10 months credit for the pre-trial custody. (Court of Appeal for Ontario, 2010 a)

  1. v. Duff [2010 ONCJ 493] is a criminal case wherein James Ian Duff was found guilty to two charges of possession of substantial amount of child pornography and was convicted for offence pursuant to s. 490.011(1)(a) of the Code for imprisonment of 10 years and pursuant to s. 161 of the Code for a period of 10 years (Ontario Court of Justice, 2010 b). Aside from DNA order pursuant to s. 487.051(4) of the Code, pornographic materials in the form of print and soft copy stored in external hard drives will be destroyed pursuant to s. 164.2(1) of the Code (ibid).

Conclusion

Although both criminal and civil cases involve an argument concerning the rights and responsibilities of the people involved in a case, it is easy to distinguish the difference between the two types of cases. In fact, criminal instances involve deliberate acts that could cause severe damage or danger to a person’s life, whereas civil cases are cases that cause two individual sides to argue over something.

Family law is distinctive even though it is categorized as civil law. Family cases related to divorce, division of property, spousal support and child custody is being handled by the Family Court of the Superior Court of Justice. Under Child and Family Services Act, the Family Court Branch has the exclusive jurisdiction in handling all other family law matters except for divorce, division of property, spousal support and child custody.

The Ontario Court of Appeal who is in-charge of hearing civil and criminal appeals coming from Ontario Court of Justice and the Superior Court of Justice. The Superior Court of Justice conducts hearings of all jury trials and trials before a judge for a preliminary hearing of all civil and criminal and youth criminal instances, while bail proceedings of other associated provincial instances and issuance of provincial search warrants are handled by the Court of Justice of Ontario.

*** End ***

References;
  • Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association. (2010). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from Criminal and Civil Law: http://www.cscja-acjcs.ca/criminal_civil_law-en.asp?l=4
  • Court of Appeal for Ontario. (2010 a, November 2). Retrieved November 4, 2010, from R. v. Richards, 2010 ONCA 728: http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2010/november/2010ONCA0728.pdf
  • Court of Appeal for Ontario. (2010 b). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from About the Court: http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/coa/en/
  • FDIC. (2010). Retrieved November 4, 2010, from Trust Examination Manual. Section 4 – Compliance/Account Administration – Personal and Charitable Accounts: http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/examinations/trustmanual/section_4/section_iv.html
  • Jenkins, J. A. (2011). The American Courts: A Procedural Approach. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC.
  • Lippman, M. R. (2010). Contemporary Criminal Law: Concepts, Cases, and Controversies. Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Merryman, J. H., & Pérez-Perdomo, R. (2007). The civil law tradition: an introduction to the legal systems of Europe and. Stanford University Press.
  • Ontario Court of Justice. (2006 / 2007). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from Biennial Report 2006 / 2007: http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/ocj/en/reports/annualreport/06-07.pdf
  • Ontario Court of Justice. (2010 a). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from About the Court: http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/ocj/en/
  • Ontario Court of Justice. (2010 b, October 28). Retrieved November 4, 2010, from R. v. Duff, 2010 ONCJ 493 (CanLII): http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2010/2010oncj493/2010oncj493.html
  • Sixth Sense. (2010). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from The distinctions between Civil Law and Criminal Law: http://sixthsense.osfc.ac.uk/citizenship/distinction_crim_civil/distinction_crim_civil.asp
  • Wood, G. D. (2002). A history of criminal law in New South Wales: the colonial period, 1788-1900. Sydney: The Federation Press.



[ad_2]

Categories
Assignment Help

Sentencing the Criminal Corporation Case Study

[ad_1]

Sentencing A Corporation To Prison

Keeping the whole facts of the case in view, it is evident that there was a moral issue in wrong doings of the company. They were guilty of doing price fixing with the help of Coca Cola, and such act is not only illegal, but immoral as well. However, the sentence that the company got as a whole from the Judge was one of its kinds, because there was no precedent before to sentence the whole corporation for some wrong doing. I don’t see this judgment as a considerable model to deal with such cases. It is true that company was involved in wrong doing, but judge should not have punished the whole corporation as there are many stakeholders, who were not part of the crime like any stockholder, but with such whole sentence, they will also be punished in one way or the other. The judge should have understood that how business corporations work, and then pass his judgment accordingly with some fairness.

Sentencing the Criminal Corporation Case Study

It is important for a judge to read the facts and then give a judgment with the real essence of compassion and fairness, which fulfills the requirements of a fair judgment. This judgment made by the judge does not look an appropriate one. If anyone has done wrong in the company, then only concerned ones should be punished for their wrong doings. One cannot punish the whole corporation and sentence the imprisonment. It was a good decision to put some executives on the community service as it would be a lesson for them to avoid such policies in future. As far as this strange judgment is concerned, I don’t think so that other corporations can be deterred by it. The corporations may be more careful in this regard as punishment for Entire Corporation is very damaging and costly in so many ways. The judge should have used some fairness as well as comparison as per the morality of the justice so that a good example would have been set for future.



[ad_2]