Asociologist studying monasteries, ashrams, student co-ops, and cohousing would be likely to notice what about these intentional communities?

Which entity owns most if the television stations, radio stations, and newspapers in the united states

Which of these is the best example of a cause-and-effect chain of events? 1. alonzo went to the music festival. 2. carmen went to the same music festival. 3. alonzo met carmen at the music festival. 1. yosef bought a new car from a dealership. 2. bailey bought a car from the same dealership. 3. bailey paid more for his car than yosef did. 1. the high school football team played a game on friday night. 2. the drama club put on a play on friday night. 3. maya watched the football game instead of the play. 1. a fast food restaurant ran an advertisement on television. 2. hank saw the advertisement and got hungry. 3. hank went to the fast food restaurant and bought food.

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.