I need an explanation for this Law question to help me study.
The Discussion Board is on the Aaron Hernandez criminal case. In essence, you are going to continue your discussion in a broader sense with your colleagues in this case.
Just share your open and honest thoughts on this case. The goal is not to have you just focusing on the questions.
The questions below are to help guide the discussion. Just go for it.
Q: Do you feel that intent was proven by the Prosecution or not? Explain.
Q: Was any evidence obtained from the defendant’s vehicle or self? If so, were there any challenges to the search and seizure of that evidence, and what were the results of the challenge? If there weren’t any search/seizure challenges discovered in your research, what evidence discussed in the case do you think could have been challenged (and why)?
Q: Did the case provide circumstantial evidence of guilt ( evidence of concealment, possession of the stolen property, etc)? If circumstantial evidence of guilt was not discussed in this case, provide an example that could be most likely for this case.
Q: Do you feel the case was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and why do you feel that? If not, what were the main issues that made the case weak, in your opinion?
The documents below accessible via the links are simply to provide you with the complete picture of the case.
REMEMBER that your initial response should have a minimum of 350-500 words. Expressing an opinion is not enough.
As a reminder, you are not sending out a text message or tweet, so when writing your post, use proper English, grammar, and writing mechanics.