Authentic Assessment

Law Name: University: Course: Tutor: Date: Authentic Assessment I Elements of crime Marc Thompson was found guilty of all nineteen counts, which includes wire fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud and using fire to commit a felony. After getting a statutory maximum on all counts, the total amount of years in prison totaled to 190 (Legal Information Institute, n.d). To start with, the first element of crime was fire, and the rational jury considered that there was plenty of evidence suggesting that Thomson caused the fire. Jurors had several reasons to disbelieve Thompson’s account due to many reasons. First, he said that on the night of the fire, he left the house at 6.15pm but neighbors saw him leave the house at 7.00pm (Batey, 2009). The prosecutors also found that during the trial, the testimony that he gave contradicts the statements he gave to an investigator some days after the fire. Thompson said during the trial that while heading to the movie, he stopped at the gas station to purchase some cigarettes. However, he had told the investigator that he only stopped to buy a newspaper at a Walgreens. The prosecutors proved that he had committed a bankruptcy fraud after lying when filling up his bankruptcy application. In addition, he secretly wired money to an offshore account so as to hide the amount of his real assets to creditors. The jurors were told that Thompson lied under oath to the bankruptcy trustee and in his divorce proceedings. The prosecutors managed to prove that the statements made by Thompson were simply were not based on truth and it was very difficult for the juror to believe him (Legal Information Institute, n.d). Another issue concerns the codicil on his mother’s will claiming that his mother did not want an autopsy. However, the attorney who drafted the will said that he was not aware of the codicil and this added more doubts on Thomson’s case. II. Defense claims The primary defense in Thompson’s trial argues that the house was burnt down by his mother. In addition, Thomson and the defense team claimed that the fire investigator, Wiley-Earls, made unsupported claims of inclusionary fire that was initiated by an accelerant. They claimed that although the floor-level burning could have been caused by a liquid accelerant sprinkled on the floor, there could also be some other causes (Legal Information Institute, n.d). The defense produced some negative tests done by the government which had not been produced during the trial. They claimed that the jury’s verdict was not supported by evidence, and that there were no confirming test results. In addition, Wiley-Earls had submitted materials for testing to the government and she never received the results. Thompson also claimed that the government failed to introduce the complete insurance policy and this implies that insufficient evidence was used to come up with convictions (Batey, 2009). However, there are claims that Thompson never claimed for the full texts to be introduced during trial and he never objected when only a portion was introduced. Thompson argues that there is no way he could have staged his mother’s suicide since he would not have been paid by the insurance company if his mother committed suicide (Legal Information Institute, n...