King justifies civil disobedience by emphasizing the moral obligation to resist unjust laws and systems, and by advocating for nonviolent direct action as a means to raise awareness and provoke societal change. He believes that peaceful disobedience is a way to expose and challenge the underlying injustices in society, while also promoting the principles of equality and justice for all individuals.
The best defense in a libel case is truth. If the statement in question is proven to be true, it cannot be considered libelous. Additionally, proving that the statement was made without malice or with a legitimate purpose can also serve as a strong defense. Reach out to a qualified attorney with experience in defamation cases for tailored legal advice.
Fair comment can be used as a defense in cases involving defamation or libel, where an individual expresses an opinion on a matter of public interest or concern based on true facts. The comment must be made without malice and in good faith, and it should be a reasonable opinion that a fair-minded person could have arrived at based on the facts available.
The sentence for defense varies depending on the circumstances of the case and the legal jurisdiction. It can range from fines to imprisonment or other penalties, as determined by the court.
The team had a strong defense that helped them win the championship game.
The defense to intentional torts typically depends on the specific tort involved. Common defenses include self-defense, defense of others, defense of property, consent, and necessity. These defenses allow individuals to justify their actions when facing a claim of intentional harm.
Committee for the Defense of Legitimate Rights was created in 1993.
Your question is too vague. If you are asking what defense do you have against a repo company if your payments are behind and they came and picked up your car without breaking the law, then nothing. If your payments are current and there is no legitimate repossession order, then they stole the car. There are too many variables to answer this question accurately.
national defense
Only in a legitimate emergency. This would be a "necessity" defense.
A Virus that claims to feel threatened by your legitimate programs, and deletes them in "self-defense"
The current secretary of defense is Robert Gates. The role of the Secretary of Defense is to be the principal defense policy advisor to the President and is responsible for the formulation of general defense policy related to all matters of direct and primary concern to the Department of Defense, and for the execution of approved policy. The Department of Defense is located at the Pentagon.
Then an answer must be filed by the defense stating this to the court. The court will then decide if it should be postponed (usually depends on the reason, if it's legitimate or not) or if the case will proceed as planned.
Breaking someone's nose can certainly be termed as common assault. Self defense would be a defense to that charge. The jury would decide if self defense was justified. You should certainly consult an attorney.
A reminder of obedience to the gods is the purpose of the choral ode following Creon's edict in "Antigone" by Sophocles (495 B.C.E. - 405 B.C.E.).Specifically, the ode criticizes Polyneices for attacking Thebes in defense of his legitimate royal claims. The chorus describes Polyneices as offending Zeus with supposedly proud boasts and deeds. The members observe that no disobedience or disrespect goes unpunished by the gods.
A reminder of obedience to the gods is the purpose of the choral ode following Creon's edict in "Antigone" by Sophocles (495 B.C.E. - 405 B.C.E.).Specifically, the ode criticizes Polyneices for attacking Thebes in defense of his legitimate royal claims. The chorus describes Polyneices as offending Zeus with supposedly proud boasts and deeds. The members observe that no disobedience or disrespect goes unpunished by the gods.
Breaking the law is always wrong in the eyes of the law. Breaking the law for a greater good or individual belief may be morally right, but it is not a defense recognized by the state.
Yes. Ignorance is never a valid defense for breaking a law.