Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 07 Dec 2016, 21:08

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

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule,

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1134
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, [#permalink]

Show Tags

06 Oct 2006, 21:11
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendantâ€™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...
If you have any questions
New!
VP
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 1025
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

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
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 528
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

07 Oct 2006, 00:18
Sould be B.
VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1134
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

07 Oct 2006, 00:45
Why not E?
VP
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 1025
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

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
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1134
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

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
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1172
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 06:34
B 2
Manager
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 173
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 33

Re: Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, [#permalink]

Show Tags

17 Aug 2016, 03:12
Even if I chose option B, I was not able to find an irrefutable reason why option C is an assumption of the passage. It requires me to make a certain assumption on the author's intentions before I can say that it is an assumption of the passage.

Can anyone please give a solid reason why option C is an assumption of the passage?
Re: Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule,   [#permalink] 17 Aug 2016, 03:12
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, 3 29 Dec 2008, 02:30
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, 3 08 Nov 2008, 03:30
4 Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, 5 30 Jan 2008, 06:15
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, 10 12 Jun 2007, 18:28
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, 2 16 Mar 2007, 14:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by