You are a federal prosecutor trying an important "landmark" case. you are quite certain that, no matter which way the case is decided, it will someday have its subject matter argued before the united states supreme court. you feel this way because the case's subject matter is clearly of significant national importance. if, in fact, the u. s. supreme court does want to hear the case after your trial has concluded, what will they do?

You are a member of the jury for a murder case. the prosecution has presented dna evidence linking the defendant to the crime scene. the defense claims that dna evidence using str analysis with 13 markers is not sufficient to reliably distinguish between people. what do you think? a. the defense is right. str analysis with 13 markers gives a 1 in 1 million chance of two people having the same pattern, leaving a reasonable doubt. b. str analysis is not sufficient. the defendant's entire genome should be sequenced. the prosecution will have to consult a genomic library to make sure their dna evidence is valid. c. the prosecution is right. str analysis with 13 markers gives a 1 in 10 billion or greater chance that two people will have the same pattern. this person was at the crime scene. d. dna evidence is not generally accepted by legal experts.

What is most likely impact of clearing natural landscape to construct high rise buildings

No renewable resources are natural resources that are limited in supply and cannot be replaced as quickly as they are used.(true or false asnwering) a. true b. false