Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids

Question

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.

It can be inferred from the passage that the author would most likely endorse which of the following proposals?

(A) Change of the exclusionary rule to admit evidence obtained by police officers acting in good faith

(B) A constitutional amendment curtailing some of the protections traditionally afforded those accused of a crime

(C) A statute limiting the application of the exclusionary rule to cases involving minor criminal offenses

(D) Change of the exclusionary rule to allow any evidence, no matter how obtained, to be introduced in court

(E) A constitutional amendment allowing police officers to obtain vital evidence by any means necessary when in pursuit of a known criminal

CounterSniper · Accepted Answer

Imo-

(A) Change of the exclusionary rule to admit evidence obtained by police officers acting in good faith 
---will keep this one for now !!

(B) A constitutional amendment curtailing some of the protections traditionally afforded those accused of a crime 
---This is out of scope , we are more concerned with  the exclusionary rule  than with protection.
--Out

(C) A statute limiting the application of the exclusionary rule to cases involving minor criminal offenses 
---Although the author mentions the minor criminal offence , but this is only a subset of the larger cause at hand
---Out

(D) Change of the exclusionary rule to allow any evidence, no matter how obtained, to be introduced in court 
---This one is  pretty extreme  , if we look at the first statement of the argument , the author says  Although its purpose is laudable 
---Out

(E) A constitutional amendment allowing police officers to obtain vital evidence by any means necessary when in pursuit of a known criminal
---This is pretty close , but again  any means necessary seems a bit extreme  
---Out

I will go with A !!

Haffun · Answer

.  
 KarishmaB

Had the passage not mentioned "even when the rights violation was a minor one, a purely technical one", could E have qualified as the right answer? I think it not the right answer because it uses strong language "by any means".

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

Haffun

Honestly, it's hard to imagine any question to which E would be the right answer. No reasonable author is going to support letting any party have free rein to do whatever they want, and even if the author did hold such an extreme view, it would have to be spelled out with absolute clarity. (Imagine the author saying something like this: "Even if dozens of innocent people are killed in the process, officers should be trusted to do what is needed to obtain evidence." It just wouldn't happen.)

Also, there's no way to know whether the author would support taking any of these actions through a constitutional amendment. That's partly a fault in this question--it seems more like something someone adapted from a law article than a normal GMAT question, and test-takers shouldn't have to know anything about how different kinds of US laws are changed. However, since A says something much milder and simpler, it is a far better answer. In general, if one potential answer is mild and doesn't assert much, and another answer goes further, that second one cannot be right. After all, if the author believed in E, they would surely believe in A, too, but it doesn't go the other way.

SatvikVedala · Answer

Hi

Can anyone explain why option B is a wrong choice

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

SatvikVedala

B is basically an extreme and unclear version of A. Choice A tells us exactly which protection the author wants to adjust: the exclusionary rule, which is the only protection discussed in the text. It also makes it clear that the author isn't trying to give the police free rein. They just want to admit evidence from officers who are "acting in good faith." Choice B, on the other hand, talks about curtailing multiple protections. What are these protections? The author only mentions one. And do we really want to curtail these protections in general? Also, why a constitutional amendment. The whole statement is broader and more extreme than anything the author suggests in the text.

Dbrunik · Answer

I would like to point out that there appears to a spelling error here. "the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even  by  introduced"

Because of this, this is a low quality question.

Tammy01 · Answer

IMO, It's B.
As option A doesn't state how much of a violation of the fundamental liberty. WHAT IF OFFICERS VIOLATES A LOT OF FUNDAMENTAL LIBERTIES TO OBTAIN EVIDENCES IN GODD FAITH.

Also, I would like to emphasize on the phrase, 
*than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty*

It suggests minor fundamental liberty violation is viable for the accused to obtain evidence.

Hence, B.

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards