Order Description
In regards to Innocent Man, give a detailed critique of the hypothesis formulated by law enforcement officials. In this analysis state examples from the book in regards to forensic science. Please give specific examples of the questionable forensic evidence. In addition detail any other forensic science discussed in the book.

Based off “Innocent Man” by John Grisham

Example he used:
INNOCENT MAN HYPOTHESIS Hypothesis = a hunch or a belief in who committed the crime—- all investigators do this

Ada Police hypotheseis = Ron and Dennis committed the crime Was this a legitimate hypothesis initially = YES Based on? 1. Ron’s previous arrest
2. The belief 2 people committed the crime 3. Ron’s rather questionable background —- drinking, violence etc.
Evaluate Hypothesis = should it have been rejected? YES Why? Based on the inadequate amount of evidence that never clearly rose too Probable Cause or Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. When hypothesis is evaluated and rejected —- you then? Experiment with another hypothesis (Glen Gore). Evidence was changed or altered, other evidence was ignored, and other suspects namely Glen Gore were never investigated properly even though the possible leads (witnesses at the bar) were always available. Was the Ron and Denis pursued due to vindictiveness or incompetence? Was ignoring other leads due to an intentional purpose to ignore this lead? Or incompetence?

Order Description
In regards to Innocent Man, give a detailed critique of the hypothesis formulated by law enforcement officials. In this analysis state examples from the book in regards to forensic science. Please give specific examples of the questionable forensic evidence. In addition detail any other forensic science discussed in the book.

Based off “Innocent Man” by John Grisham

Example he used:
INNOCENT MAN HYPOTHESIS Hypothesis = a hunch or a belief in who committed the crime—- all investigators do this

Ada Police hypotheseis = Ron and Dennis committed the crime Was this a legitimate hypothesis initially = YES Based on? 1. Ron’s previous arrest
2. The belief 2 people committed the crime 3. Ron’s rather questionable background —- drinking, violence etc.
Evaluate Hypothesis = should it have been rejected? YES Why? Based on the inadequate amount of evidence that never clearly rose too Probable Cause or Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. When hypothesis is evaluated and rejected —- you then? Experiment with another hypothesis (Glen Gore). Evidence was changed or altered, other evidence was ignored, and other suspects namely Glen Gore were never investigated properly even though the possible leads (witnesses at the bar) were always available. Was the Ron and Denis pursued due to vindictiveness or incompetence? Was ignoring other leads due to an intentional purpose to ignore this lead? Or incompetence?