6–6. business case problem with sample answer— criminal liability. during the morning rush hour, david green threw bottles and plates from a twenty-sixth- floor hotel balcony overlooking seventh avenue in new york city. a video of the incident also showed him doing cart- wheels while holding a beer bottle and sprinting toward the balcony while holding a glass steadily in his hand. when he saw police on the street below and on the roof of the building across the street, he suspended his antics but resumed tossing objects off the balcony after the police left. he later admitted that he could recall what he had done, but claimed to have been intoxicated and said his only purpose was to amuse himself and his friends. did green have the mental state required to establish criminal liability? discuss. [people v. green, 104 a. d.3d 126, 958 n. y.s.2d 138 (1 dept. 2013)] (see criminal liability.)

it looks like its all of the above. [.wpal1kojopfdpojfrfionrnif.knfdsnksjosjo]

explanation:

you have to combine all of your answers together to

.wpal1kojopfdpojfrfionrnif.knfdsnksjosjo

chronological thinking is an indispensable tool to structure a historical narrative and to give meaning to a sequence of events. the final section presents the results of a survey to test the chronological thinking of lower secondary school students carried out by the educational research institute.

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.