If there is an open criminal case on a person, can the arresting deputy make any contact with the suspect in that case?

Contact is a word that encompasses verbal and non-verbal communication and physical touching. In executing an arrest, a police officer—as a general point of fact—must come into contact with the person being arrested.
For instance, a person placed under arrest may be subject to a physical search by the arresting officer (see Chimel v. California), which would require the officer to touch the person. More specifically, however, police must provide "Miranda warnings" to a person who has been arrested (see Miranda v. Arizona). This requires the arresting officer to clearly articulate, using verbal communication, several cornerstone constitutional rights to the arrested individual.
More generally, however, duly commissioned or deputized law enforcement officers have authority exceeding that of normal citizens, not less.
In cases of a criminal case where an arrest was previously effected, police can contact the suspect in that case in the normal course of investigation and subject to the requirements of law (e.g., a suspect can decline to answer most questions without the presence of an attorney). There is no statutory or constitutional barrier that prevents any specific officer from doing so.

Does Macbeth realize he is flawed?

Absolutely. The most striking thing about Macbeth is that he never feels entirely comfortable in his own skin once he's murdered Duncan and taken his throne. He immediately regrets killing Duncan, and this sets the pattern for the rest of the play, during which Macbeth, far from enjoying his new-found power, actually finds it a crushing burden.
As Macbeth wades deeper and deeper in blood, he realizes that there's no turning back. So on he goes, killing anyone he perceives as a threat to his crown, even innocents like Macduff's family. All the while, Macbeth is acutely aware of his own flaws, most notably his overriding ambition. But he can't help himself because he's succumbed to the forces of darkness. It's the witches' prophecies that determine how he conducts himself on the throne. Among other things, this means that there's no need for Macbeth to confront, let alone try to overcome, his flaws. He can simply absolve himself of all responsibility for his blood-soaked tyranny by convincing himself that it's all part of some gigantic cosmic plan.

What rules does Frank break?

A good example of Frank's breaking the rules comes when he's admitted to hospital after suddenly coming down with typhoid fever. The hospital, which is run by the Catholic Church, has very strict rules against fraternizing between the sexes. This is to ensure an appropriate degree of propriety. Another important rule states that patients with typhoid like Frank are not allowed to have any contact with patients in the diphtheria ward.
Yet Frank breaks both rules in getting to know Patricia, a fellow patient at the hospital. She introduces Frank to the works of Shakespeare, sparking in him a life-long love of literature. For the first time in his life, Frank has been acquainted with the beauty of written language, and it's truly a life-changing experience. Even after Patricia passes away—she's actually dying of diphtheria when Frank first meets her—Frank continues to read voraciously during his period of convalescence, a habit that will lead to his desire to become a professional writer.

What role does the eavesdroppers play in the story Hearts and Hands?

The eavesdroppers' brief conversation reveals the story's twist: that Mr. Easton is not the marshal, but rather a prisoner handcuffed to the marshal on his way to Leavenworth prison. We need the eavesdroppers to reveal this information because Miss Fairchild's completely in the dark. She sees the well-dressed, dapper young man she knew back East and immediately assumes that he must be the marshal. After all, why else would anyone from such a well-heeled background be on his way to prison?
All the evidence is staring the young lady right in the face but she's too blinded by her snobbish assumptions to see this. She comes from a social environment in which appearances count, and so her shallowness prevents her from recognizing that the man she once knew—or thought she knew—is actually a common criminal.

Why does monsters like demons, vampire, zombies, and so on continue to form such an important part of lore and storytelling?

The use of monsters in literature not only speaks to our own deep-rooted personal fears, but they also embody the current state of our society as a whole. One of the best explanations of our usage of monsters as tools to reflect a cultural movement, moment, or collective fear can be found within Jeffrey Jerome Cohen's Monster Culture (seven theses). One of Cohen's most notable ideas from this work is that "the monster's body is a cultural body." As Cohen states within his work, "The monster is born at this metaphoric crossroads, as an embodiment of a certain cultural moment--of a time, a feeling, and a place." Monsters quite literally represent the world around us, as they become living embodiments of our current crises.
A monster can take on the fear, anxiety, or desires of an entire society and can communicate them in a creative way that may be able to reach more people than your typical news story. Literature and art are ways for us to express our concerns, fears, and desires in a bold, unapologetic manner. For example, the current societal fascination with zombies speaks directly to our growing concerns over infectious diseases plaguing our world, as well as our ever-present fears of extreme disaster and devastation.
We may not even realize our own fears until they are presented to us, so monsters exist as a sort of "wake-up call" to us about what we are afraid of and thus, what changes we need to fight for within our society. Monsters help us better understand our fears, and through this heightened awareness, we can become more proactive about social and political change within our society.
If we were never afraid of anything, change would never occur. Writers such as Anne Rice utilized monsters to make a statement on sexuality and thus helped pave the way for social acceptance in what used to be a very closed-off society. In order to capture the attention of the public, we often need to shock them. This is where monsters come into play. Once the attention of the public is captured, change can finally begin to bloom.

Monsters will always form a large part of the lore and stories that we create. We may see monsters in our folklore, but the reason why lies within our minds. Psychology provides a few reasons why we keep coming back to stories that frighten yet intrigue us.
In his book Haunted: On Ghosts, Witches, Vampires, Zombies, and Other Monsters of the Natural and Supernatural Worlds, Leo Braudy explains that “we are drawn to see what we also dread to see.” His idea of why we are drawn to tell stories and make myths that deal with monsters is because we have an almost detrimental fixation on those things that we fear most. Even if something is a primal fear, we are drawn to see it because there is something deep within us that desires to confront those fears.
Carl Jung, a Swiss psychologist, explained that monsters represent the dark parts within us and that recognizing that darkness is the first step to mastering it. He called the darkness within the shadow and said,

The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is an essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.

Part of what might draw us to stories about monsters is that the monsters reflect the darkness within us—whether it be cruelty (vampires), mindlessness (zombies), or loss of control (werewolves)—every story fascinates us and draws us in because we see ourselves in them. The stories of monsters ring true because even if we don't meet a ghost or ghoul in real life, we know that we will have to contend with the darkness in ourselves and others because monsters are real. The monsters of lore are metaphors for those we face in real life.

How did Will's arm get scratched?

Will gets scratched by a rabbit he finds in a trap.
When Will is going to empty the traps, he's hoping that nothing is there. He's still new to the country life and isn't sure how to do many of the things that his aunt, uncle, and cousins can do. However, a rabbit is in the trap. Will is unsure about what to do, so he lifts the trap and opens it. The rabbit attacks him.
The trap falls to the ground, and the rabbit sneaks away. Will is left with only the claw marks on his arm. These let his family know that the traps weren't empty. He says he's only upset that there won't be rabbit stew for dinner. They make stew anyway, with a different rabbit.

How is the Mexican government different from the US government?

The Mexican system of government is very similar to its American counterpart. For one thing, it's a federal system with a clear separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Nevertheless, there are a number of differences between the two systems. For example, representatives of the lower house of the Mexican Congress, the Chamber of Deputies, serve three-year terms, whereas their American equivalents in the House of Representatives serve only two.
The biggest difference between the two systems comes in relation to presidential elections. In the United States, the President is limited to no more than two four-year terms. In Mexico, presidential elections are held every six years. Once elected, the President is restricted to serving just one term. And once he leaves office, even if he only served for a short time in a caretaker capacity, he can never be President again. This principle emerged from the Mexican Revolution of 1910–1920, which came about largely as the result of widespread anger at President Porfirio Diaz's continual reelections—often in dubious circumstances—for over 25 years.
Unlike the United States, Mexico has a multiparty system, though three parties tend to dominate political life. As such, alliances and coalitions are a normal feature of Mexican politics in a way that simply wouldn't be possible in the United States. In Mexico, political parties must secure 2% of the vote in federal elections if they are to be formally registered by the INE, the institution in charge of organizing those elections. Meeting this threshold of support entitles political parties to public funding, something else that sets the Mexican system apart from that prevailing north of the border.