After a successful weight loss‚ talented singer Miranda Lambert looks dashing. The workout has changed her body and she has reshaped it in a flawless way. She dropped some of her weight so she can appear as hot for her new album Platinum. Her trainer shared some of her weight loss secrets with Women’s health forum. Miranda Lamberts is 33 years old country singer who have recently captured the gaze of her fans by losing several pounds of weight. About the exact number‚ well she is not telling that
Premium Nutrition English-language films Obesity
Introduction Objectives Validate the Beer-Lambert law for KMnO4. To determine the pKa for an acid-base indicator To estimate the equilibrium constant for the formation of complex ion Fe(NSC)²ꭞ The function of part two of the experiment is to find the value of the constant K‚ in the following equilibrium constant: K=[Fe (NSC) ²⁺]/ [Feᶟ⁺] [NCS⁻]‚ while not disrupting the equilibrium. Theory For part one. The majority of chemical compounds are known to absorb UV or visible light. Depending
Premium Chemistry Concentration Laboratory glassware
which affected the law enforcement is Miranda v. Arizona case. This case had a significant impact on law enforcement in the United States‚ by making what became known as the Miranda rights part of routine police procedure to ensure that suspects were informed of their rights. Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape of an 18 year old girl by Phoenix Police Department. Mr. Miranda was an immigrant‚ and although the officers did not notify Mr. Miranda of his rights‚ he signed a confession
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Police
Miranda v. Arizona “You are going to prison”‚ is the statement Ernesto Miranda probably heard as he was arrested by police from the comfort of his home‚ in 1963‚ without warning or being advised of his Fifth Amendment rights. Miranda‚ 22 years old‚ was charged with raping an 18-year-old female. Subsequently‚ he was brought to a police department station where he was placed into an interrogation room isolated from everyone. After two grueling hours of questioning; Miranda was feeling dazed‚ confused
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court of the United States Law
The Miranda Law HIS 303 Prof. Dorey January 6‚ 2011 On March 13‚ 1963‚ in Phoenix‚ Arizona‚ Ernesto Miranda‚ a man with a past criminal record‚ was arrested at Arizona in his home. Ernesto Miranda was arrested and brought into custody by the police and brought to the Phoenix police station. He was suspected and then later identified as the person who stole $8.00 from a Phoenix‚ Arizona bank worker. Ernesto Miranda was questioned for two hours by police‚ then confessed to the robbery
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Brief Case Miranda v. Arizona Early in 1963‚ a 17 years old woman was kidnapped and raped in Phoenix‚ Arizona. The police investigated the case‚ and soon found and arrested a poor‚ and mentally disturbed man. The name of this man was Ernesto Miranda. Miranda was 23 years old when he was arrested. On March 13‚ 1963‚ Miranda was arrested based on circumstantial evidence linking him to the kidnapping and the rape. After 2 police officers interrogated him for 2 hours‚ he signed a confession to the
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court of the United States Chief Justice of the United States
Miranda vs. Arizona Miranda vs. Arizona was the case that altered the criminal justice system. It gives criminals the rights they do not deserve. Ernesto Miranda was the man who was responsible for the change in law enforcement. He argued that he was not informed of his rights during his arrest and his Fifth and Sixth amendments were violated. After that‚ the Miranda Rights were established to protect the suspect from refusing to answer self-incriminating questions and the right to an attorney
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Police
Miranda v. Arizona‚ 384 U.S. 436 (1966)‚ was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which passed 5–4. The Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police‚ and that the
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Miranda v. Arizona Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
sense backed by brain science leaves no doubt that juveniles are often more vulnerable to the pressures of police questioning‚ and the protective procedures designed for adults offer limited help. Studies show that younger juveniles misunderstand Miranda warnings and developmental psychologists question whether minors are ever competent to make knowing‚ intelligent and voluntary waivers of their rights. Because of their incompetence‚ investigators use interrogative tactics to their advantage. Such
Premium Interrogation Miranda v. Arizona Crime
Fuller ITT-Technical Institute | Criminal Investigations | Unit 4 Assignment 2: Suspects and Miranda In this essay I will be discussing the Miranda decision‚ when Miranda should and should not be read‚ provide scenarios of both‚ and discuss my opinion on whether Miranda warnings are still a valid concept in modern society and policing. The rationale for the Miranda decision is that Ernesto Miranda felt that he was compelled by the interrogating officers to give information on the crime thus
Premium Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Miranda v. Arizona Police