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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
More and more TTP students are earning 100th percentile scores on the GMAT Focus Edition. The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in your preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way you should study.
Grab 20% off any Target Test Prep GMAT Focus plan during our Flash Sale. Just enter the coupon code FLASH20 at checkout to save up to $320. The offer ends soon.
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Join us in a comprehensive talk about the F1 Student Visa process with, Travis Feuerbacher, former U.S. Visa Officers and licensed U.S. immigration attorney having expertise working for the U.S. Department of State....
Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
27 Jul 2004, 10:19
Show timer
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0%
(00:00)
correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 0
sessions
HideShow
timer Statistics
Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the prosecution's key witness.
1. Robert can be convicted on the basis of Edward's testimony against him
2. Edward's testimony would show that Edwards himself perticipated in Roberts' wrongdoing.
3. The crime of which Roberts is accused can only be committed by a person acting alone.
4. If the jury learns that Edwards himself committed some wrong, they will refuse to believe any part of his testimony.
If all four propositions are taken as a group, it can be pointed out that the scenario they describe is
A - a typical situation for a prosecutor.
B - impossible because the propositions are logically inconsistent.
C - unfair to Edwards, who may have to incriminate himself.
D - unfair to Roberts, who may be convicted of the crime.
E - one which Roberts' attorney has created.
If propositions 1,2 &3 are assumed to be true and 4 false, which of the following best describes the outcome of the trial?
A - Both Edwards and Roberts will be convicted of the crime of which Roberts is accused.
B - Both Edwards and Roberts will be convicted of some crime other than the one with which Roberts is already charged.
C - Roberts will be convicted while Edwards will not be convicted.
D - Roberts will not be convicted
E - Roberts will testify against Edwards.
Again, are these gmat type of CRs. Please explain your choices.
thanks.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
27 Jul 2004, 10:43
1) C
Edward will put himself in trouble in either case...i dont have much info...
2) D
Robert will not be convicted if 1,2 & 3 are correct..
A is ruled out due to rule 3
B is idealistic..out of scope..
C is ruled out because of rule 2
E is out of scope
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
27 Jul 2004, 10:44
Hi...
my ans are : 1) C
lets take the above argument as follows ,
premise 1 = edwards is the guy who can say something about the crime above
premise 2 = when edward says something about the crime it shows that he himself has participated in that
premise 3 = If edwards has been prt of the crime and there can be only
one who can do so then edwards is the guy who has done ...
premise 4= now If edwards is the one who has done the crime then the judge does not believe in the testimony of edwards...
there are two things that can come out from ths 1: edwards himself has commited the crime 2 : edwards role as the witness for the crime as roberst doing goes empty...
ths means that edwartds has done the CRIME and robert is not guilty....
so edwardsparticipation as the key witness would make HIM the crime doer and make the situation very UNFAIR towards him....
the ans is c ...
2) the ans here is D ... cos edwards will be the crime doer according to the argument 's premises and also the forth statement is not true roberts will be saved from being convicted
these I believe are wuite tough type simply becos they are difficult to understand...
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
27 Jul 2004, 19:15
B and C. This is an LSAT type question
1- First, Robert can ONLY be convicted if Edwards testifies. However, as soon as Edwards speaks up, he will incriminated himself as #2 says. Finally, if Edwards commited some wrong, the jury will automatically disqualifies what he says as untrue as #4 says. This is clearly inconsistent and is an impossible situation: Edwards' testimony will never be considered and Robert will never be convicted.
2- How can we say that Robert will convicted for some other crime? Edward maybe will but we know nothing for Robert. B is out. D also is out because if Edward speaks, then Robert will be convicted. This can definitely happen although the crime is commited by only one person. In this case, Edward will be convicted for something else than the crime itself while Robert will be convicted for THE crime. IMO C is best because Robert will be convicted for that crime while Edward will NOT be convicted for THAT crime. The latter may be convicted for complicity or some other wrongdoing though.
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
27 Jul 2004, 20:11
1) B, agree with Paul
2) D. Between B, C & D, I think B and C is equal cos they both need an assumption. D is the best cos it can be inferred from the question.
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
27 Jul 2004, 21:58
The OA is
1-B ( for the reasons stated by Paul)
2.D ( for the reasons stated by enigmatic007)
I was not able to understand from the 2 premises -
2. Edward's testimony would show that Edwards himself perticipated in Roberts' wrongdoing.
3. The crime of which Roberts is accused can only be committed by a person acting alone.
how we can infer that Edwards committed the crime. It could be that the actual crime can be committed by only one person(that is Roberts) and Edward could have helped him in the planning stage (or something other than committing the actual act). The 2nd statement says that Edwards participated but not committed and no where is it mentioned that the whole process of this crime act involves only one person.
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
28 Jul 2004, 00:00
anuramm wrote:
The OA is 1-B ( for the reasons stated by Paul) 2.D ( for the reasons stated by enigmatic007)
I was not able to understand from the 2 premises - 2. Edward's testimony would show that Edwards himself perticipated in Roberts' wrongdoing. 3. The crime of which Roberts is accused can only be committed by a person acting alone.
how we can infer that Edwards committed the crime. It could be that the actual crime can be committed by only one person(that is Roberts) and Edward could have helped him in the planning stage (or something other than committing the actual act). The 2nd statement says that Edwards participated but not committed and no where is it mentioned that the whole process of this crime act involves only one person.
hi anu...
you are perfect in ur asumption about the two above statements...but think it like this and think it very narrow ...remember it is critical reasoning and U just have to be very very CRITIC(al) about this although it is very difficult to know when and for what type of argumnets one has to be so narrow....
look and take what the premise reads and do ''not'' look behind the meaning...
premise two says = if edwards gives his testimoni then it paves way for his participation in the crime ....
premise three ONLY one guy can commit the Crime
partcipation = commiting/ and one cannot infer it to be just planning or masterminding the crime...
its something like only the ONE who has commited the crime can know what did happen and how it happened and NO one else wud know ...
since edwards says roberts commited the crime ... a crime which can be both told and testified only by one who has really commited it ... the ''bullet'' hits him back ...
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the
[#permalink]
28 Jul 2004, 04:51
hi enigmatic007,
thanks for the explanation. i am able to understand the line of reasoning you have used here. but somehow i am not clear of when i need to draw a line in my inferencing process.
this is my conclusion - i am not going to work anymore on these wierd CR problems if they are typical LSAT type. i would rather spend my time on GMAT+ or anything else that is more relevant to GMAT.
thanks.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
gmatclubot
Re: Roberts is accused of a crime, and Edwards is the [#permalink]