You have new items in your feed. Click to view.
Question and answer
Many organizations have rules that are supposed to prevent employee theft. Which of the following is the most logical reason employees might steal from their employer? a. The definition of employee
theft depends on the organization.b. Some people are more likely to engage in employee theft than others.c. They feel the organization does not treat them as well as they deserve.d. They needed to steal to support themselves or their family.
d. They needed to steal to support themselves or their family.
Expert answered|rhey22787|Points 242|
Question
Asked 8/5/2012 5:35:47 PM
0 Answers/Comments
Get an answer
New answers
Rating

There are no new answers.

Comments

There are no comments.

Add an answer or comment
Log in or sign up first.
Questions asked by the same visitor
The Police Commissioner is under pressure to solve a murder and offers $100,000 for information leading to an arrest and conviction of the culprit. Mary suspects her neighbor, Phoebe, is the guilty party and calls Bob, a friend and police officer, with her suspicions. When Bob visits Phoebe, she unsuccessfully resists arrest, though Bob is severely injured. Phoebe is ultimately convicted of the murder and assaulting Bob. Mary insists all the reward money belongs to her. Is she right?
Weegy: She gave information leading to the arrest and conviction of the subject. [ She gets the reward (btw no police commissioner is going to offer any reward, let alone $100,000) The policy is that the police do not, and actually cannot legally, offer a reward in most states. The reward and moneys posted have to be from private businesses or individuals. City, taxpayers, money cannot be used. It is also against the law for officers to receive the benefit of rewards. They are public servants, not PI's or bounty hunters. Of course I agree, It is only fair and it is truly the only way to get information from a posted reward. If you do not hold up your end of the reward bargain then rewards will become useless in helping to apprehend and convict offenders. ] (More)
Question
Expert Answered
Asked 7/30/2012 8:08:06 AM
0 Answers/Comments
can you give your own opinion and show proof of the policy
Weegy: What type of policy are you talking about? User: The Police Commissioner is under pressure to solve a murder and offers $100,000 for information leading to an arrest and conviction of the culprit. Mary suspects her neighbor, Phoebe, is the guilty party and calls Bob, a friend and police officer, with her suspicions. When Bob visits Phoebe, she unsuccessfully resists arrest, though Bob is severely injured. Phoebe is ultimately convicted of the murder and assaulting Bob. Mary insists all the reward money belongs to her. Is she right? What is the policy consideration behind the relevant rule? Do you agree with the policy? Why or why not? (More)
Question
Expert Answered
Asked 7/30/2012 8:12:06 AM
0 Answers/Comments
The Police Commissioner is under pressure to solve a murder and offers $100,000 for information leading to an arrest and conviction of the culprit. Mary suspects her neighbor, Phoebe, is the guilty party and calls Bob, a friend and police officer, with her suspicions. When Bob visits Phoebe, she unsuccessfully resists arrest, though Bob is severely injured. Phoebe is ultimately convicted of the murder and assaulting Bob. Mary insists all the reward money belongs to her. Is she right? What is ...
Weegy: She gave information leading to the arrest and conviction of the subject. [ [ She gets the reward (btw no police commissioner is going to offer any reward, let alone $100,000) The policy is that the police do not, and actually cannot legally, offer a reward in most states. The reward and moneys posted have to be from private businesses or individuals. City, taxpayers, money cannot be used. It is also against the law for officers to receive the benefit of rewards. They are public servants, not PI's or bounty hunters. Of course I agree, It is only fair and it is truly the only way to get information from a posted reward. If you do not hold up your end of the reward bargain then rewards will become useless in helping to apprehend and convict offenders SUnshine all Day :) ] User: can you show proof of the policy Weegy: I cannot, Thanks SUnshine all Day :) (More)
Question
Expert Answered
Asked 7/30/2012 8:15:33 AM
0 Answers/Comments
(2) Do you agree with the policy consideration behind the relevant rule? That any promises made by any parties must be supported by legally sufficient and bargained for consideration that is something of value received or promised to convince a person to make a deal. WHY/WHY NOT?
Weegy: Policy considerations may become relevant to the making of The policy consideration behind the relevant rule is; if a judicial decision when the decision cannot be made by reference to established rules, [ [ whether grounded in precedent or even in statute. The Court will then consider the values and policy arguments that are relevant to the articulation of the potential rule (or principle). The Court must make an evaluation of them as a preliminary to articulating the rule to be applied in the instant case. The rule will have an application that extends beyond the parties to the case. Just how far it will extend depends upon its terms, its nature, and subject matter. ] ] (More)
Question
Expert Answered
Asked 7/30/2012 9:08:24 AM
0 Answers/Comments
(2) Do you agree with the policy? That any promises made by any parties must be supported by legally sufficient and bargained for consideration that is something of value received or promised to convince a person to make a deal. WHY/WHY NOT?
Weegy: I somewhat agree. If a certain party makes a promise, it should be evaluated for its legality before it is put into effect. (More)
Question
Expert Answered
Asked 7/30/2012 9:11:47 AM
0 Answers/Comments
25,971,147 questions answered
Popular Conversations
x 3(x 2 + 5x + 1) User: Simplify 8 + 3{x - 2[x + 5(x + 3)]}. User: ...
Weegy: -7(8 + k) (-7)(8) + (-7)(k) = -56 - 7k User: Find the product. -7(8 + k) Weegy: -7(8 + k) (-7)(8) + ...
8/29/2016 8:46:50 AM| 2 Answers
Communication is considered ethical if it ...
8/29/2016 10:21:58 AM| 2 Answers
-4+-4+-4 User: Integers contain the whole numbers. True False
Weegy: True, Integers contain the whole numbers. User: 5*-4= User: 5(-4)= User: Simplify (3/10)(-5/9). Weegy: ...
8/29/2016 11:05:23 AM| 2 Answers
Convert the fraction to higher terms. Enter the value of the missing ...
Weegy: Convert the fraction to higher terms.the value of the missing numerator. 1/4 = 7/28 User: 110.2 square yards ...
8/29/2016 9:11:35 PM| 2 Answers
Weegy Stuff
S
Points 793 [Total 864] Ratings 5 Comments 743 Invitations 0 Offline
S
L
P
P
P
P
Points 697 [Total 3952] Ratings 0 Comments 697 Invitations 0 Offline
S
1
L
Points 671 [Total 1505] Ratings 3 Comments 641 Invitations 0 Offline
S
Points 151 [Total 151] Ratings 0 Comments 151 Invitations 0 Offline
S
Points 58 [Total 285] Ratings 0 Comments 58 Invitations 0 Offline
S
L
P
P
P
Points 46 [Total 3862] Ratings 0 Comments 46 Invitations 0 Offline
S
Points 40 [Total 45] Ratings 0 Comments 0 Invitations 4 Offline
S
Points 15 [Total 15] Ratings 0 Comments 5 Invitations 1 Offline
S
L
C
Points 11 [Total 4491] Ratings 1 Comments 1 Invitations 0 Offline
S
Points 10 [Total 10] Ratings 1 Comments 0 Invitations 0 Offline
* Excludes moderators and previous
winners (Include)
Home | Contact | Blog | About | Terms | Privacy | © Purple Inc.