Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 27 Aug 2014, 19:14

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule,

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1136
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, [#permalink] New post 06 Oct 2006, 21:11
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights, has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts. Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty, and even when it has been clear that the police officers were acting in good faith, the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even by introduced. In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again.

The author of the passage above assumes all of the following EXCEPT:

(A) The constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected.
(B) Most cases in which the exclusionary rule has been invoked have involved purely technical violations of constitutional principles.
(C) The number of cases whose outcome has been affected by the exclusionary rule is significant.
(D) Some of the defendants set free under the exclusionary rule have been guilty of serious criminal offenses.
(E) Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights.

Again, narrowed it down to two. couldn't decide between the two...
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 1026
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 06 Oct 2006, 23:48
My choice was between A and B.

Finally B.

Author also assumes that constitutional rights of criminals should be protected.
_________________

The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short;
the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 532
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 07 Oct 2006, 00:18
Sould be B.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1136
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 07 Oct 2006, 00:45
Why not E?
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 1026
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 07 Oct 2006, 04:45
kripalkavi wrote:
Why not E?


"Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty"

By saying this in the argument, author tried to defend officials who deviated technically but did not infringe on fundamental rights.

"rather than" is a key word
_________________

The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short;
the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1136
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 08 Oct 2006, 22:47
ak_idc wrote:
kripalkavi wrote:
Why not E?


"Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty"

By saying this in the argument, author tried to defend officials who deviated technically but did not infringe on fundamental rights.

"rather than" is a key word


hmmm...thanks. Gotta read more carefully. OA is B
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1176
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 09 Oct 2006, 06:34
B 2
  [#permalink] 09 Oct 2006, 06:34
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, marcodonzelli 4 30 Jan 2008, 06:15
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, prude_sb 15 06 May 2006, 15:27
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, rianah100 4 23 Nov 2005, 05:52
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, mahesh004 3 19 Nov 2005, 09:02
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, ywilfred 5 07 Sep 2005, 06:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule,

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.