One reason christian crusaders lost the holy land was that
a.
they didn’t have...
Social Studies, 15.11.2019 18:31, plshelpme53
One reason christian crusaders lost the holy land was that
a.
they didn’t have the support of the eastern orthodox church.
b.
they didn’t understand the reason for the conflict.
c.
they lacked support from kings and nobles.
d.
they traveled long distances to the battles.
Answers: 1
Social Studies, 22.06.2019 14:00, danielahalesp87vj0
An individual who is experiencing a prolonged period of stress would likely have levels of circulating than an individual who was not experiencing stress.
Answers: 2
Social Studies, 23.06.2019 02:00, babycakez3500
By the 1820s, many americans wanted to have an equal number of senators from the free states and the slave states. to achieve that, what would need to be true? sorry, the correct answer is: explanation review you answered: questions answered 11 time elapsed 00 17 08 hr min sec challenge stage 2 of 3 get 5 of 6 correct
Answers: 1
Social Studies, 23.06.2019 05:30, nanagardiner08
Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.
Answers: 2
Mathematics, 27.05.2021 20:50
Mathematics, 27.05.2021 20:50
Mathematics, 27.05.2021 20:50
Mathematics, 27.05.2021 20:50