Homework Help for Law

In Canada's legal justice system, sentencing is the process of determining the appropriate punishment for a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. Sentencing is a critical part of the criminal justice system as aims to balance, the interest of the offender, the victim and society as a whole.

1. The Supreme Court's decision was based on the notion that life sentences with no possibility of parole are " cruel and unusual punishment". Do you agree or disagree with this assertion? Why or why not?

I’m doing a class tutorial please answer this question so i can talk about my opinion in class to get the full mark. Please make sure you provide examples to support your opinion so i can get the full mark and make sure you explain thoroughly

In Canada’s legal justice system, sentencing is the process of determining the appropriate punishment for a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. Sentencing is a critical part of the criminal justice system as aims to balance, the interest of the offender, the victim and society as a whole.

1. How do you think this ruling will affect the public’s perception of the Canadian justice system? Will it increase or decrease public confidence in the system? Why?

answer this question based on beccarias speech on punishment

I am doing a class discussion that I will be getting marks out of. Please answer the questions below THROUGHLY with real life proof so that i can get the full marks.

Supreme court of Canada, strikes down life without parole ruling. In Canada's legal justice system, sentencing is the process of determining the appropriate punishment for a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. Sentencing is a critical part of the criminal justice system as aims to balance, the interest of the offender, the victim and society as a whole.

1. What alternatives to life parole sentences do you think that Canadian justice system can implement to ensure public safety and rehabilitation of offenders?

2. In your opinion, how will this ruling change the way in which Canadian courts sentence individuals convicted of violent crimes? Do you think that other countries should adopt a similar approach? Why or why not?

I am doing a class discussion that I will be getting marks out of. Please answer the questions below THROUGHLY with real life proof so that i can get the full marks.

In Canada's legal justice system, sentencing is the process of determining the appropriate punishment for a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. Sentencing is a critical part of the criminal justice system as aims to balance, the interest of the offender, the victim and society as a whole.

1. In what ways do you think this ruling will affect the victims of violent crimes and their families? Will this ruling bring them justice or will it further traumatize them?

I am doing a class discussion that I will be getting marks out of. Please answer the questions below THROUGHLY with real life proof so that i can get the full marks.

In Canada's legal justice system, sentencing is the process of determining the appropriate punishment for a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. Sentencing is a critical part of the criminal justice system as aims to balance, the interest of the offender, the victim and society as a whole.

1. What do you think about the Supreme Court's ruling on striking down life parole sentences? Do you believe this will have a positive or negative impact on the Canadian justice system? why or why not

I am doing a class discussion that I will be getting marks out of. Please answer the questions below THROUGHLY with real life proof so that i can get the full marks.

In Canada's legal justice system, sentencing is the process of determining the appropriate punishment for a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. Sentencing is a critical part of the criminal justice system as aims to balance, the interest of the offender, the victim and society as a whole.

1. The Supreme Court's decision was based on the notion that life sentences with no possibility of parole are " cruel and unusual punishment". Do you agree or disagree with this assertion? Why or why not?

I am doing a class discussion that I will be getting marks out of. Please answer the questions below THROUGHLY with real life proof so that i can get the full marks.

Supreme court of Canada, strikes down life without parole ruling. In Canada’s legal justice system, sentencing is the process of determining the appropriate punishment for a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. Sentencing is a critical part of the criminal justice system as aims to balance, the interest of the offender, the victim and society as a whole.

1. What do you think about the Supreme Court’s ruling on striking down life parole sentences? Do you believe this will have a positive or negative impact on the Canadian justice system? why or why not

2. In what ways do you think this ruling will affect the victims of violent crimes and their families? Will this ruling bring them justice or will it further traumatize them?

3. The Supreme Court’s decision was based on the notion that life sentences with no possibility of parole are “ cruel and unusual punishment”. Do you agree or disagree with this assertion? Why or why not?

4. What alternatives to life parole sentences do you think that Canadian justice system can implement to ensure public safety and rehabilitation of offenders?

5. In your opinion, how will this ruling change the way in which Canadian courts sentence individuals convicted of violent crimes? Do you think that other countries should adopt a similar approach? Why or why not?

6. How do you think this ruling will affect the public’s perception of the Canadian justice system? Will it increase or decrease public confidence in the system? why?

The picture that I have attached are some videos in articles you can refer to to answer the questions to provide proof to back up your answers. Please make sure you answer them thoroughly. And make it sound like you have a great understanding of the topic and provide proof to support so i can get the full marks

‘Whilst the Fraud Act 2006 is a welcome development in the modernization of the law of Fraud it does not go far enough in resolving the key failings of the previous law and is already outdated and need of reform.’

Critically analyze the above statement.

MARTIN LUTHER KINGS definition of justice is that segregation distorts the soul and damages personality therefor whatever degrades human morality is unjust and whatever uplifts it is just

AL PACINOS definition of justice to see that guilty proven guilty and innocent walk free, and that justice is the finding of the truth

MICHAEL WALZER definition of justice is that justice means equality

now answer this question:

1. Martin Luther King in bud “Letter from Brimingham Jail”, Al Pacino, in his famous “Justice for All” speech, and Michael Walzer, provide their own definition of justice. Do you agree with their definition of justice? Why or why not? (this is worth 10 marks)

MAKE SURE THE SENTENCES ARE PROPERLY STRUCTURED TO GET THE FULL 10 MARKS. THROUGHLY EXPLAIN THEIR VIEW OF JUSTICE AND BACKUP YOUR POINTS AND EXPLAIN WHY OR WHY NOT U AGREE WITH THEIR VIEW. MAKE SURE ITS AT A GRADE 12 UNIVERSITY LEVEL

READ THE ARTICLE IN THE PHOTOS AND ANSWER THESE DISCUSSION QUESTIONS BELOW:

1. According to Beccaria, why is it necrssary for the state to sometkmes punish people?

2. Beccaria assumes that offenders are rational individuals pursuing their self-interest. Do you think this is an accurate view of all or most offenders?

3. Do you think Beccaria would favour death penalty? Why or why not? (He discusses this issue in some detail in his essay on crimes and punishments)

4. Evaluate our current system of punishing offenders, using the criteria for effective punishments listed by Beccaria. In particular, do we satisfy the criteria listed by Beccaria?

5. Beccaria states that the "end of punishment is no other than to prevent the criminal from doing further injury to society." do you agree or do you feel that there are other purposes for punishment? Defend your answer

make sure you answers are at a grade 12 university level

Al Pacino defines justice as seeking the truth

Martin Luther King says that a law consists of just and unjust laws (that’s his definition of justice)

Michael Walzer defines justice as equality

QUESTION

1. Martin Luther king in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, Al Pacino, in his famous “Justice for All” speech, and Michael Walzer, provide their own definition of justice. do you agree with their definition of justice? Why or why not? 

Al Pacinos definition of justice is: Justice can only be achieved through equality he define justice a seeking in finding the truth. Al pacino she’s equality as guilty been proven, innocent walk free.

Martin Luther Kings definition of justice is: unjust and just laws. (use this information about unjust and just laws to answer the questions. below)

Michael Walzer definition of justice: justice to Michael is equity to all

QUESTION

1. Martin Luther King in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”’ Al Pacino in his famous “Justice for All” speech, and Michael Walzer each provide their own definition of justice. Do you agree with their definition of justice? Why or why not? 

after reading martin luther king letter from birmingham jail answer this question

1. how does Dr. King explain why he urges people to obey the supreme court’s decision outlawing segregated public schools, and then breaks laws he disagrees with.

provide proof from the text and explain this clearly w easy words and throughly

READ MARTIN LUTHER KING “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and then answer these questions BRIEFLY

1. How does Dr. King explain why he urges people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision, outlawing, segregated public schools, and then breaks laws that he disagrees with?

2. Any law that the grades a person is unjust according to Dr. King What does “degrade” mean? In what way does he thinks segregation is degrading to the individual?

3. According to Dr. King there is a difference between “just laws and unjust laws.” how do we determine a law that is just an a law that is unjust? Do you agree with Dr. Martin Luther King’s explanations?

4. When he says that a law can be “just on its face, but I’m just on this application”, What example does he give? What attitude does Dr. King say one should adopt, if breaking and unjust law?

5. Note that Dr. King does not use the term “civil disobedience.” Find dictionary definition of this word. Does Dr King’s actions meet the definition?

6. is there any current public law that you believe is unjust based on Dr. King’s description.