Jane is a college student rushing across campus to take her final physics exam. On her way to the classroom, Jane passes another student passed out in the library parking lot. The student is unconscious and surrounded by a pool of blood. Jane fears that she will miss her final exam and fail the course if she stops to help, so she walks right by without intervening. The student later dies as a result of his injuries, and doctors believe he would have survived if Jane had called for help earlier when she saw him. Can Joseph be charged with a crime? Why or why not?

Joseph can not be charged for this action because he did not do intentionally any harm to Joseph. He was going for his exam in college. He was in a hurry and worried not to miss the exam.

He did not show humanity but he is not responsible for the crime because he was innocent. He did not help Jane but along with he did not hurt Jane. Jane was a college student. So she was worried about her exam.  

Thus Jane was not responsible for Joseph's death.  

Jane cannot be charged for a crime.

Explanation:

Jane is not to be held accountable for any crime. He did not cause any harm to the person who was laying injured & died later. Although ; Jane should have helped the injured person & tried to save his/ her precious life. But, his not doing so can be termed wrong only on moral grounds. It is not legally punishable, as Jane was not deliberate the cause of that condition, death of the injured person.

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.

the correct answer is modern american cars are not available due to trade restrictions.

trade between cuba and the united states have serious restrictions. the u.s. imposed an economic embargo on cuba, that among other things means that modern american cars are not available due to trade restrictions.

in response to some governmental actions of the authorities from cuba, president john f. kennedy proclaimed an embargo on trade between both countries in february 1962. the trade embargo remains active until this day and was implemented directly by the departments of commerce and the department of treasury.

in president trump’s administration, there is a national security presidential memorandum that "strengthens the policy of the u. s.", affecting trade with cuba.