Question

2. Do you think Lum May's testimony is overly biased? Explain why or why not. (4 points)








3. Do you think Lum May's statement is a credible source about the events of November 3, 1885, in Tacoma? Explain why or why not. (4 points)








4. Do you think James Wickersham's letter is overly biased? Explain why or why not. (4 points)








5. Do you think James Wickersham's letter is a credible source about the events of November 3, 1885? Explain why or why not. (4 points)

Answer 1

Answer:

no I don't think anything

Explanation:

why don't you think instead of leting other think

Answer 2

Lum may's testimony is biased in all the aspects asked.

• When someone's memory or view of anything favours one person, idea, or organisation over another, we can say that person is prejudiced. It is the incapacity to maintain objectivity.

2.

Although May's description of the events on November 3rd, 1885 may have been slanted, it is impossible to deny that, in my opinion, his story is not too biased. He describes the altercation's brutal nature, the burning down of Chinese homes, and the shock that rendered his wife insane.

3.

All of the statements made by Lum May are backed by evidence such as:

1. The ruins of Chinese dwellings, now nothing but ashes
2. A similar account of what happened from the hundreds of Chinese residents who were there; his wife's fragile mental state.
3. All of this makes us think that Lum May is a reliable source for the events that occurred in Tacoma in Nov 1885.

4.

We might conclude that the letter from James Wickersham is not only incredibly prejudiced in character but also a wildly untrustworthy source of information, in contrast to the reliable testimony of Lum May. Given that several of the individuals from that day were charged with crimes, Mr Wickersham would have a lot to lose if he gave the correct facts.

5.

Lum May's assertions are supported by evidence, leading us to believe that her account of what happened is accurate and unaffected by bias. However, James Wickersham's conflicting claims and the potential consequences of telling the truth make it clear that his letter is an unreliable and excessively biased source.

#SPJ2