Answer each individually  1.In her article ‘Being Virtuous and Doing the Right Thing,’ Julia Annas argues that p

1.In her article "Being Virtuous and Doing the Right Thing," Julia Annas argues that part of what we can learn from a virtue ethics is the difference between a) a conception of right action that depends on rule following, in the sense of something like a technical manual, and b) a conception of right action that understands right action in terms of what a ‘moral expert’ would do.

After posting, return to the board and read over the posts of your fellow classmates. Choose at least one classmate and create a post responding to his/her initial post on the Discussion Board.Annas is clearly inspired by Aristotle in building up her conception of the moral expert and of how such expertise is developed-and this inspiration clearly comes, at least in part, from what Aristotle says in Book II of the Nichomachean Ethics.

2.For this project, you should write a short discussion addressing the following question. ‘Do you think that it is possible to find support in Aristotle for the following ideas of Annas’s:  1) the notion of a moral expert, 2) the notion of moral development as a process of gaining expertise; and 3) the idea of truly ‘right’ actions as the actions of the expert?

If yes, try to show where in Aristotle’s text that support will come from. If no, try to show what it is that Aristotle does say that leads you to believe that he would not view things as Annas does.

2.Can theories developed using all-male samples be used to explain crimes committed by females? Explain your answer.

3.An officer arrested a young man for drug possession and placed him in the back of a patrol car. On the way to the jail, the officer asked the young man his name, to which  he replied “None of your business.” The officer then stated, “Look you’re in big trouble. I might be able to help you if you tell me who your supplier is before we get to the jail. Once we get there, you are out of my hands and I can’t help you. The young man then says to the officer, “I just know he goes by the name Rambo. I get my supply from him.” The prosecutor charges the young man with possession and distribution of controlled dangerous substances. At trial, will the comments the young man made be admissible?

1. Yes, it is a confession and that was made voluntarily and not coerced.

2. Yes, the young man demonstrated he knew he did not have to talk to the officer when he told him “None of your business”.  His confession was intelligent.

3. No, questions and comments in a police car create an unduly coercive atmosphere.

4. No, this was a custodial interrogation.

You must select answer A, B, C, or D for your answer. When you select the answer, you must support your selection from materials in the text, and list the page number of the text which supports your conclusion.  You must also explain why each and every one of the other three answers are incorrect. 

3.

4.A man dressed in black and wearing a skeleton mask robbed a local bank. A witness getting a good look at the robber described him as a large and tall male with long dark hair. The witness also told the police the direction the robber went when he ran from the bank. Within several minutes and just a few blocks from the bank, police officers saw a man who met the description. The officers detained the man, handcuffed him, put him in their patrol car and took him to the bank. The officers told the witness they caught a person who met the description she gave and asked the witness to ID the person. They took the witness outside to the police car, so she could ID the person who was sitting in the car. The witness stated “There’s no doubt about it, that’s the guy who robbed the bank.” Prosecutors indicted the man and he is now scheduled for trial. His attorney files a motion to suppress the ID made by the witness at the bank. How should the court rule on this motion?

1. Deny the motion and allow the ID, as it is the juries role to determine if the witness made the correct ID.

2. Grant the motion, the defendant was entitled to have his attorney as this was a “critical stage” of the proceedings and attorneys are required under the Sixth Amendment.

3. Deny the motion and allow the ID, as the defendant was not entitled to an attorney under these circumstances.

4. Deny the motion, as the defendant did not request an attorney to be present and unlike custodial interrogations where attorneys are needed unless waived, a defendant must make a Sixth Amendment request for an attorney.

You must select answer A, B, C, or D for your answer. When you select the answer, you must support your selection by materials from the text, and list the page number of the text which supports your conclusion.  You must also explain why each and every one of the other three answers are incorrect.