Analysis Summary:

The article's core claim about Harvard Law School possessing an original Magna Carta is plausible but lacks sufficient verification from the provided sources. While some sources mention Harvard Law School and the Magna Carta separately, none directly confirm the specific discovery described. The article exhibits a slight bias towards sensationalizing the find.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim 1:** Harvard Law Paid $27 for a Copy of Magna Carta.
• Verification Source #2: Mentions Harvard Law School's Criminal Justice Policy Program.
• Verification Source #4: Mentions Magna Carta in the context of historical legal documents.
• Verdict:* Neither source confirms the claim about the purchase price or the item being a copy. *Fail to cover*.
• Claim 2:** It’s an Original.
• Verification Source #4: Discusses the concept of "original" documents in the context of Magna Carta.
• Verdict:* Does not confirm that Harvard's copy is an original. *Fail to cover*.
• Claim 3:** Two British academics discovered that a “copy” of the medieval text, held in Harvard Law School’s library for 80 years, is one of seven originals dating from 1300.
• Verification Source #2: Mentions Harvard Law School.
• Verification Source #4: Mentions Magna Carta and the concept of "original".
• Verdict:* No source confirms the discovery by British academics, the duration of its presence in the library, or the claim that it's one of seven originals from 1300. *Fail to cover*.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• Verification Source #4: Supports the general idea that there are "original" versions of the Magna Carta.
• All sources *fail to cover* the specific claims about the Harvard Law School's Magna Carta, the purchase price, the discovery by British academics, the duration of its presence in the library, or the claim that it's one of seven originals from 1300.