The United States v. Fields case ended up on a federal death sentence imposed on Fields for commitig a federal capital offense.
This sentence was made largely on the basis of the opinion of a psychiatrist who stated that he could predict Fields would be a risk to society in the future.
The problem here is that the psychiatrist issued this crucial testimony without doing any testing or offering any objective empirical data whatsoever.
To this day, there's still much debate involving how a Court can determine risk to society or future violence from an individual, in a safe and reliable manner that reaches necessary standards for a case of such magnitude assessing death penalty.
Hope this helps!
The Supreme Court ruled that segregation was illegal
B.
The Supreme Court ruled that “separate but equal” facilities were legal
C.
The Supreme Court ruled that women couldn’t hold office in Federal jobs
By setting up a new system of how the banks worked
Answer:
the marshall plan aided europe in its recovery after world war II
george marshall was a secretary of state
A.
Sundiata's determination to overcome his handicap and become a great leader inspired others.
B.
Sundiata organized the handicapped people to form a special division in his army.
C.
Sundiata turned his handicap against the people who had harmed him with the help of his brothers.
D.
Sundiata used his brains instead of physical strength to overtake the mighty armies of the Sossos.
Answer:
A.
Sundiata's determination to overcome his handicap and become a great leader inspired others.
Explanation:
I took the test
b. colonialism
c. glasnost
d. apartheid
Answer:
Apartheid was the system of separating white and black peple.