Writers of literary analysis should consider that their readers:
A. have not read the work being discussed but only need to have pertinent details explained.
B. have not read the work being discussed and need a full summary in order to understand.
C. have read the work being discussed and do not need any background information.
D. have read the work being discussed but still need pertinent details explained.

D. have read the work being discussed but still need pertinent details explained.

Explanation:

When writing the literary analysis, you should consider who the audience is. As you are not writing the general review but the study of the piece, the chances are it will be read by the knowledgeable audience that has read the work that is discussed - your professor, other students, researchers, etc.

Therefore you should avoid summaries that retell the whole piece, as the audience has already read it.

However, because of the understanding of the analysis, some most important details should be explained to have a full, detailed evaluation and interpretation.

This is more in order to analyze everything than to retell the plot or details to the audience. While readers do know the piece, you are there to introduce them to the fuller background of the piece and explain the details.

its so obvious. its 999 obviously.

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.