Mitigation is defined as: actions taken to reduce or eliminate
long-term risk to people and property from hazards and their effects.

A. in weeks v. united states (1914), the court established the exclusionary rule, which was incorporated to the states in mapp v. ohio (1961), and the court established the concept of a "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule in united states v. leon (1984). in their opinion, the supreme court pointed out that compliance with the exclusionary rule can have a cost to society (criminals can go free) that outweighs the benefits (stopping illegal searches by police). ultimately, the court determined that despite the exclusionary rule, evidence can still be admitted in situations where police made genuine "good faith" efforts to act legally, but technically acted illegally, in obtaining the evidence. explain the exclusionary rule good faith exception and explain and support whether you agree or disagree with the concept of a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule? why or why not? use the lesson notes and/or one news source to support your answer.

You are serving on a jury. a plaintiff is suing the city for injuries sustained after falling down an uncovered manhole. in the trial, doctors testified that it will be 5 years before the plaintiff is able to return to work. the jury has already decided in favor of the plaintiff, and has decided to grant the plaintiff an award to cover the following items: a. recovery of 2 years of back-pay ($34,000 for two years ago, and $36,000 for last year, which ends today). assume that it is december 31 and that all salary is received at year end. this recovery should include the time value of money. b. the present value of 5 years of future salary. assume that the plaintiff's salary would increase at a rate of 3 percent per year. c. $100,000 for pain and suffering. d. $20,000 for court costs. assume an interest rate of 7 percent. what should be the size of the settlement?

Aresearcher conducts a focus group to learn about attitudes towards hygiene and disease prevention. two weeks after the focus group, the researcher learns one of the subjects had a heart attack at home and was hospitalized, but made a full recovery. based on dhs regulations, the researcher report this event to the irb? no, this does not need to be reported since the subject had the heart attack when they were home, not at the focus group. no, this does not need to be reported since it is unrelated to participation in the study. no, this does not need to be reported because two weeks have passed. no, this does not need to be reported since the subject recovered.