Nao acho que alguem poderia fazer para vc, mas algumas dicas sao, como a tecnologia afeta a comunicacao entre a familia, qual a diferenca entre uma familia do seculo 19, para o seculo 21. faca uma redacao comparando que vc vai se dar bem!
Answer:
Mga kinaharap ng bansang Pilipinas sa pananakop ng dayuhan;
*marami ang namatay at nagkasakit
*nasira ang mga makasaysayang gusali tulad ng Intramuros at Fort Santiago
*nagutom ang mga taong Pilipino
*nawalan ng trabaho ang mga magsasaka
Explanation:
Hope it helps:)
<em>#</em><em>C</em><em>a</em><em>r</em><em>r</em><em>y</em><em>o</em><em>n</em><em>l</em><em>e</em><em>a</em><em>r</em><em>n</em><em>i</em><em>n</em><em>g</em>
The jury returned a guilty verdict on July 14, 1921. Each of the defendants was found guilty of first-degree murder. The weight of evidence—the weapons, ballistic tests, and eyewitness testimony—and the issue of consciousness of guilt were crucial in convicting Sacco and Vanzetti, but emotional factors were also heavily present.
***The presiding judge, a man who had requested to work on the trial because he hated anarchists, influenced the jury against the suspects with his instructions about the guilty behavior of the men.***
The prosecutor emphasized the Italian background of Sacco and Vanzetti.
A six-year struggle to save Sacco and Vanzetti followed the trial. Countless observers worldwide were convinced that political intolerance and racial bigotry had condemned two men whose only offense was that of being foreigners, atheists, and anarchists. Sacco and Vanzetti defenders eventually included radicals, trade unionists, intellectuals, liberals, and even some conservatives. Others were steadfast in their belief that the American system of justice could do no wrong and that the two subversives were guilty as charged, had been fairly tried, and deserved the maximum penalty.
The fate of Sacco and Vanzetti, however, was not decided in the arena of public opinion. Eight motions for a new trial in accordance with Massachusetts law were submitted to the trial judge. Several pertained to perjured testimony by prosecution witnesses and to collusion between local police and Justice Department agents. Another addressed a jailhouse confession by a convicted bank robber, Celestino Madieros, who claimed he and other members of the Morelli gang of professional criminals had committed the South Braintree holdup and murders. Each motion was denied. After the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that no errors of law or abuses of discretion had been committed, the judge sentenced Sacco and Vanzetti to death on April, 9, 1927.
In the face of mounting criticism of the legal proceedings and the impending death sentence, Massachusetts Governor Alvan T. Fuller appointed a committee on June 1, 1927 to review the case and advise him on the issue of clemency. The Lowell committee, named after its chair, Harvard University President A. Lawrence Lowell, ignored exculpatory evidence the defense had discovered since the trial while validating the prosecution's every step. Reporting its findings to Governor Fuller on July 27, the Lowell Committee declared that the trial and appeals process had been fair and advised against clemency. Governor Fuller followed the committee's recommendation. Despite continuing worldwide protests and demonstrations, Sacco and Vanzetti were electrocuted at Charlestown State Prison on August 23, 1927.
