Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 23 Mar 2017, 11:45

# R2 Decisions:

Berkeley Haas; Decision Tracker (Join Chat Room 5)  |  Yale SOM; Decision Tracker (Join Chat Room 4

### 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

# Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 28 Dec 2009
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 3

Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 04:48
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

62% (02:52) correct 38% (01:49) wrong based on 52 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting Mr. Jackson. Regrettably, there were no eyewitnesses to the crime, but Mr. Smith has a violent character. Ms. Lopez testified earlier that Mr. Smith, shouting loudly, had threatened her. Smith never refuted this testimony.
The attorney’s argument is fallacious because it reasons that
(A) aggressive behavior is not a sure indicator of a violent character
(B) Smith’s testimony is unreliable since he is loud and aggressive
(C) since Smith never disproved the claim that he threatened Lopez, he did in fact threaten her
(D) Lopez’s testimony is reliable since she is neither loud nor aggressive
(E) having a violent character is not necessarily associated with the commission of violent crimes

I got this wrong, please suggest
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 311
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools: Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Followers: 18

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 69

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 05:03
isn't it (E)?

having a violent character is not necessarily associated with the commission of violent crimes

Mr. Smith's violent character is well-proven with help of Ms. Lopezs testimony, but it doesn't make Mr. Smith a criminal
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 225
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 269 [0], given: 1

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 05:37
modirashmi wrote:
Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting Mr. Jackson. Regrettably, there were no eyewitnesses to the crime, but Mr. Smith has a violent character. Ms. Lopez testified earlier that Mr. Smith, shouting loudly, had threatened her. Smith never refuted this testimony.
The attorney’s argument is fallacious because it reasons that
(A) aggressive behavior is not a sure indicator of a violent character
(B) Smith’s testimony is unreliable since he is loud and aggressive
(C) since Smith never disproved the claim that he threatened Lopez, he did in fact threaten her
(D) Lopez’s testimony is reliable since she is neither loud nor aggressive
(E) having a violent character is not necessarily associated with the commission of violent crimes

I got this wrong, please suggest

The answer should be E
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 4382
Followers: 371

Kudos [?]: 3826 [1] , given: 106

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 05:44
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
SHUD BE C...
_________________

Absolute modulus :http://gmatclub.com/forum/absolute-modulus-a-better-understanding-210849.html#p1622372
Combination of similar and dissimilar things : http://gmatclub.com/forum/topic215915.html

Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 311
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools: Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Followers: 18

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 69

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 06:17
chetan2u wrote:
SHUD BE C...

That's how I see this stimulus:

Facts:
a) There are no eyewitnesses of the crime (Smith assaulting Jackson)
b) Ms. Lopez testified earlier that Mr. Smith, shouting loudly, had threatened her
c) Smith never refuted this testimony.

Attorney concludes that:
1) Mr. Smith has a violent character
2) Mr. Smith is guilty of assaulting Mr. Jackson < - Main conclusion

Both of attorney's conclusions could be attacked and refuted. But main point of the paragraph is about Mr. Smith being criminal. So IMO we should find logical fallacy in this main conclusion
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 4382
Followers: 371

Kudos [?]: 3826 [1] , given: 106

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 07:54
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
shalva wrote:
chetan2u wrote:
SHUD BE C...

That's how I see this stimulus:

Facts:
a) There are no eyewitnesses of the crime (Smith assaulting Jackson)
b) Ms. Lopez testified earlier that Mr. Smith, shouting loudly, had threatened her
c) Smith never refuted this testimony.

Attorney concludes that:
1) Mr. Smith has a violent character
2) Mr. Smith is guilty of assaulting Mr. Jackson < - Main conclusion

Both of attorney's conclusions could be attacked and refuted. But main point of the paragraph is about Mr. Smith being criminal. So IMO we should find logical fallacy in this main conclusion

hi.. how i look at this Q is that The attorney’s argument is fallacious because it reasons that means we have to find something the attorney is trying to prove...
as for A and E, the attorney is trying to prove the opposite of '"(E) having a violent character is not necessarily associated with the commission of violent crimes ... only C fits in his reasoning
_________________

Absolute modulus :http://gmatclub.com/forum/absolute-modulus-a-better-understanding-210849.html#p1622372
Combination of similar and dissimilar things : http://gmatclub.com/forum/topic215915.html

Intern
Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 18
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [1] , given: 1

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 09:12
1
KUDOS
Ans s/b C.

I eliminated A & E because the attorney's argument relies on the opposite of the assumptions in those choices i.e that aggressive behavior is an indicator of a violent character (A) and having a violent character is associated with the commission of a violent crime(E).

We do not know about B from the passage as Smith did not testify - even if he did - it is not discussed in passage. I eliminated D as we do not know anything about Lopez's character/temperament from the passage. This leaves me with only C.
Manager
Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 211
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 40 [1] , given: 9

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 09:39
1
KUDOS

Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting Mr. Jackson. Regrettably, there were no eyewitnesses to the crime, but Mr. Smith has a violent character. Ms. Lopez testified earlier that Mr. Smith, shouting loudly, had threatened her. Smith never refuted this testimony.
The attorney’s argument is fallacious because it reasons that:

(C) since Smith never disproved the claim that he threatened Lopez, he did in fact threaten her

Conclusion drawn: Mr. Smith is guilty of assaulting Mr Jackson.
Based on: Ms Lopez testified that Mr Smith threatened her, which he did not refute. Therefore he did threaten her. This indicates his violent character.
Assumption: Since Mr Smith did not refute the testimony, therefore he did threaten her.
_________________

"Always....Read between the lines"

Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 143
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 1

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 11:00
I think Answer is E. whats the OA?
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 311
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools: Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Followers: 18

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 69

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 11:09
chetan2u wrote:
hi.. how i look at this Q is that The attorney’s argument is fallacious because it reasons that means we have to find something the attorney is trying to prove...
as for A and E, the attorney is trying to prove the opposite of '"(E) having a violent character is not necessarily associated with the commission of violent crimes ... only C fits in his reasoning

You're right , completely missed that point. We should find same line of reasoning in answer choices as one in attorneys conclusion.
Manager
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 199
Location: Manchester UK
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 418 [0], given: 6

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 14:01
Even i think its E whats the OA?
Intern
Joined: 28 Dec 2009
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 3

Re: Mr Smith [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2010, 23:38
Thanks, gr8 explanation, i had chosen (E) but got it wrong
OA i (C)
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10668
Followers: 957

Kudos [?]: 213 [0], given: 0

Re: Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2015, 13:03
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting   [#permalink] 21 Jun 2015, 13:03
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
I'm not finding accuracy in Find the conclusion/Inference 1 21 Feb 2012, 23:23
Q24)Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of 7 13 Jan 2011, 09:10
1 Q24)Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of 11 23 Apr 2010, 22:47
6 Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting 23 19 Feb 2010, 06:07
1 If Max were guilty, he would not ask the police to 4 01 Jul 2009, 01:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Attorney: I ask you to find Mr. Smith guilty of assaulting

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 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®.