There are 3 parts to this assignment each part needs a smallparagraph discussing about each assignment.)Dutyto Disclose CJ 9 D Introduction In Brady v. Maryland (1963), theU.S. Supreme Court held that due process is violated when the prosecutionsuppresses evidence favorable to an accused upon request where the evidence ismaterial either to guilt or to punishment. The Brady Rule on Disclosure ofEvidence to the Accused purports that the prosecutor has a duty to discloseevidence favorable to a defendant. Many cases have since been decided thatprovide additional insight and clarification to this rule, such as UnitedStates v. Agurs (1976), United States v. Bagley (1985), Kyles v.Whitley (1995), and Strickler v. Greene (1999).InstructionsIn your main post:·Analyze the Brady rule in thecontext of the Court’s rationale for this decision from a criminal justicepractitioner standpoint. ·Explain how the Court interpreted andrefined the Brady rule in one of its subsequent cases— United Statesv. Agurs, United States v. Bagley, Kyles v. Whitley, or Stricklerv. Greene. ·Explore how the Court’s interpretation inyour selected case, following Brady, impacts the application of therule.JuryVerdictsCJ 9 D IntroductionIn our criminal justice system,defendants have the right to a trial by jury. This right is guaranteed in theBill of Rights, specifically, the 6th Amendment. While the Constitution doesset forth requirements as to the size of the jury, it does not require that thejury reach a unanimous verdict. A non-unanimous verdict is a verdict by a jurythat is not the result of a unanimous vote. In Apodaca v. Oregon, theSupreme Court held that a 10-to-2 vote for conviction is constitutional. In Johnsonv. Louisiana, the Supreme Court held that a 9-to-3 vote for conviction wasconstitutional. Given the defendant’s right to be proven guilty beyond a reasonabledoubt, the lack of requirement for a unanimous verdict may beg the questionas to whether it is appropriate to allow majority verdicts rather thanunanimous verdicts.InstructionsFor this discussion, consider the factthat the Supreme Court has discarded the argument that a less-than-unanimousverdict violates the reasonable doubt standard, stating that the term reasonabledoubt refers to the individual juror and not the entire jury.Inyour main post:·Explorewhether all criminal trials should require unanimous verdicts, using a relatedcase as the basis for your position. ·Articulatetwo practical issues that might arise under unanimous verdict requirements. ·Describethe implications of non-unanimous jury verdicts as a criminal justiceprofessional.LitigationAgainst Law Enforcement OfficialsCJ 10D IntroductionCivil liability may occur under tort lawin several circumstances. For instance, a police officer will be found liablewhen what happened can be blamed solely on the officer and on nobody else andtranscends negligence. Additionally, a supervisor can be held liable when thesupervisor is involved in the act or when what happened can be linked to one orall of the seven areas of supervisor negligence. Finally, a city or county isconsidered liable when what happened was the result of policy or custom.Recent cases have addressed the issue ofliability regarding both police officers’ individual liability as well as thepotential civil liability of government entities. Two such cases are CastleRock v. Gonzales (2005) and Brosseau v. Haugen (2004).(http://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court)InstructionsFor this discussion, review CastleRock v. Gonzales and Brosseau v. Haugen, considering that both ofthese cases could be said to favor law enforcement.In your main post:·Explain potential sources of tortliability and whether they would be individual and/or departmental. ·Articulate adjustments at the officer anddepartmental levels to avoid civil liability. ·Describe the overall impact of thesources of tort liability on the field of criminal justice.