Cristina is packing up some evidence in a case she was working on. She got a strange request from the prosecutor: “Witness would like her locket back for the sentencing and mitigation hearing, please. She wants the defendant to be able to use it.”

Intrigued, Cristina reads through the case file. This is what she learns.

Milo and Tara have grown up together in the same neighborhood all their lives. When they went to first grade, Milo's dad had an accident at work. He was permanently injured and, for a number of reasons, he never received the right medical care and the family struggled. Milo's dad became addicted to his pain medication as his health got worse.

Tara's parents gave her a locket as a gift for starting school. They worked very hard to buy it, and it is one of her most valued possessions. On one side is a photo of her parents, and on the other side is a photo of Tara and Milo.

When Milo and Tara were in fourth grade, Milo was having an even tougher time at home. He didn't always have enough to eat, and he almost never got much sleep. His mom worked a night shift, so it was up to him to take care of his younger sisters. Because of all this, he lost his temper and got into a fight at school. It was the first and only time, but it became a disciplinary matter in his file. At the end of the year, Tara was tested for gifted classes, and although Milo was always about at the same level as Tara, or he had been, he was not tested since his disciplinary file disqualified him.

By the time Milo and Tara went to seventh grade, Milo's dad had been arrested for his drug use. He was first placed into a diversion program, but the program was far too expensive for the family to manage, and he violated the terms due to nonpayment. He went to prison to serve out his time for the nonviolent drug possession and use offenses. Milo has started working after school so he was tired all the time, and his grades were dropping. Tara continued to do well, and as always, she wore her locket everywhere.

At 17, Tara was thinking about going to college. Milo wanted to go, but it just didn’t seem possible. Thinking about what he might be missing out on made Milo sad, and he and Tara decided to go have a pizza to relax and have fun for an evening. At the pizza place, some young men started harassing Milo and Tara. One of them yanked Tara's locket off of her neck, cutting into her skin and breaking the chain. Tara screamed and fell to the floor.

Milo was shocked. He jumped the man with the locket. He wrestled the locket from the man, but the man and his friends were drunk, laughing and sneering. He made a racist comment to Milo, and Milo snapped. He beat the man up—badly. When he was pulled off, the police were there and the man was unconscious.

Tara told the police what happened and begged them not to arrest Milo, but they explained to her that he went way too far. He should have stopped after he recovered the locket. Milo was charged with aggravated assault, and because the man sustained a concussion, Milo faces prison time. His sentencing is next week.

Cristina puts down the report, and sighs.

In your notes, answer one of the following questions using bulleted notes:

As a witness for the defense, what sort of arguments would you make on behalf of Milo at sentencing based on the theories you studied?
or
Based on your understanding of crime theories, what could be done after the trial to help Milo avoid a similar situation in the future?

What does the first amendment’s right to assemble refer to? the right of a group to express unpopular opinions the right of a group to make false claims the right of a group to meet in groups the right of a group to speak in protest

What is the difference between university and college?

September 10, 2016: you’ve been assigned to investigate a hit-and-run incident. when you arrive at the scene, it’s raining and foggy. the roads are slick. it looks like the crash occurred during the early evening, about 5: 30 pm, a couple hours before dark. you notice a green 2010 chevrolet camaro lying off the road on an embankment and a blue 2014 toyota camry several yards back. both vehicles are damaged. robert b., the driver of the camaro, had severe back injuries and was taken to the hospital. the only witness is the toyota driver, fred h. fred h. was driving in the right lane when the accident occurred. according to fred, a red ford pickup truck (year and model unknown) suddenly swerved across the highway from the left lane. the pickup truck hit the front left side of the camaro in one of the center lanes, pushing it off the road before speeding away. the camaro lost control and sideswiped the toyota as it skidded across the highway, denting the toyota’s left side panels. the camaro then skidded across the grass to the right of the highway and crashed into a low concrete wall. the hood and both sides of the camaro have extensive damage. the toyota driver pulled up behind the camaro and called the police. the accident occurred near miami, florida, on i-95 northbound, a 5-lane highway. it happened just before the exit 16 offramp. fred h. and robert b. both passed breathalyzer tests. neither had any passengers in the car. as you search the scene, you notice: tire tracks/skid marks left on the pavement deep red scrapes across the camaro’s panels and green scrapes across the toyota’s panels broken car window fragments of a hood or panel a torn rag an empty beer can deep tire marks and footprints in the mud of the embankment at the scene use the information above to answer the following questions. for each of a – e above, give an example of a type of evidence you could collect from that item and how you would collect it. (one to two sentences each) fill out a crash form for the incident. use the form florida crash report and use the information in the description above to create a brief three- to five-sentence summary for the “narrative” section. use the witness’s description to draw a diagram of the incident. if you can’t find a piece of information for the form, just leave that part blank. impression evidence three separate tire marks were collected from the scene. the marks were found in a pattern that supports fred’s version of events. three tire tread marks, a, b, and c. tire a appears to be worn flat in the middle from overinflation, tire b is narrow and appears worn on the outside edges, tire c looks normal and is not worn at all tires leave different types of marks based on their wear patterns. for example, tires that are constantly flat will leave different impressions than tires that are normally inflated or overinflated. the tires tend to wear out on the parts that are most exposed to the road. you checked out the tires of the two vehicles at the scene. here’s what you found: two tires side by side. a camaro tire which appears to be in good shape, and a toyota tire which appears worn on the outside edges the camaro had normal tires, but the toyota’s tires were a little flat and overly worn on the outside edges. the condition of the red ford truck’s tires is unknown. match the three impressions with the cars that most likely created them. what can you hypothesize about the red pickup’s tires? could this have anything to do with the accident? explain your answer. (two to four sentences) a red pickup fitting fred’s description was later seen running a stoplight. police pulled it over for a check. its tire impressions looked like this: a single tire tread mark which appears worn on the outside edges based on the evidence, do you think this was the same red pickup that rammed the camaro? why or why not? (one to two sentences)