Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.
One example: Paragraph: "Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release.". Claim: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Solution is here: We really don't understand why only a handful of mainstream news organizations reported this story. (At least in what we found.) The most common emergency surgery in the world. Rushing to emergency surgery may not carry any benefit. Waiting a few hours may be safer and less expensive. Why is that not a story? We applaud USA Today for finding time and space and clearly it didn't need to free up much space to do a good job telling the story. The story explains that as many as 300,0 appendectomies are done each year in the US. That figure alone explains why this is an important study to report.
Explanation: The output is an analysis of the claim while considering the paragraph as a reference. The output highlights the key features presented in the paragraph and explains the claim accordingly.

Now, solve this: Paragraph: The case has gained attention among journalists and rights groups. The 28-year-old Hajar Raissouni has been jailed since Aug. 31. She denies having had an abortion and claims she was married to her Sudanese fiance under Islamic law. The fiance, a gynecologist and two others also were jailed. They appeared in court as dozens of protesters gathered outside the courthouse in the Moroccan capital, Rabat, chanting "freedoms are in danger." The judge on Monday denied Raissouni's temporary release request. Abortions are illegal in Morocco as is premarital sex. Raissouni faces up to two years in prison if convicted on all counts. Raissouni claims she was arrested outside a clinic she visited for an "urgent intervention," not an abortion. "She was not arrested in flagrante delicto. She didn't confess to any crime. But this is the state of our country ... We've reached the level where women's bodies become the subject of public debate," said one of Raissouni's lawyers, Fatiha Chtatou. Raissouni didn't speak in court Monday, but was expected to when it convenes again over the case on Sept. 16. She works for the Arabic-language paper Akhbar Al Yaoum, a major daily critical of the state. Family members maintain that her arrest was politically motivated and that she was targeted because she is a journalist who covers a grassroots opposition movement. Amnesty International has called for Morocco to drop charges and release her. "Hajar is a victim in all this," her uncle Soulaimane Raissouni, a columnist at the paper where she works, said in an interview. Police reportedly forced Raissouni into a medical exam at the time of her arrest. "It is a rape of her body. It shows that the state controls the bodies and freedom of a woman," said Ibtissam Lachgar, spokeswoman for the rights group Alternative Movement for Individual Freedoms. Claim: Moroccan journalist denies charges of illegal abortion.
Solution:
A judge ruled that a Moroccan journalist remain in custody after she appeared Monday in a packed courtroom on charges that she had an illegal abortion after becoming pregnant while single.