It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 14:51

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers

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

Hide Tags

Senior CR Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1244

Kudos [?]: 1009 [0], given: 60

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2017, 02:21
6
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

50% (01:44) correct 50% (01:28) wrong based on 191 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers have a lower conviction rate than those who rely on court-appointed public defenders. This explains why criminals who commit lucrative crimes like embezzlement or insider trading are more successful at avoiding conviction than are street criminals.

The explanation offered above would be more persuasive if which one of the following were true?

(A) Many street crimes, such as drug dealing, are extremely lucrative and those committing them can afford expensive private lawyers.

(B) Most prosecutors are not competent to handle cases involving highly technical financial evidence and have more success in prosecuting cases of robbery or simple assault.

(C) The number of criminals convicted of street crimes is far greater than the number of criminals convicted of embezzlement or insider trading.

(D) The percentage of defendants who actually committed the crimes of which they are accused is no greater for publicly defended than for privately defended defendants.

(E) Juries, out of sympathy for the victims of crimes, are much more likely to convict defendants accused of violent crimes than they are to convict defendants accused of “victimless” crimes or crimes against property.

Source: LSAT
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Actual LSAT CR bank by Broall

How to solve quadratic equations - Factor quadratic equations
Factor table with sign: The useful tool to solve polynomial inequalities
Applying AM-GM inequality into finding extreme/absolute value

New Error Log with Timer

Kudos [?]: 1009 [0], given: 60

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Posts: 72

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 27

GMAT 1: 610 Q48 V24
Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2017, 13:36
I would go for "D" as it would be necessary to know the percentage of people who actually have committed the crime in both the categoeis, then only it could be established if the money can save the defendants of one category.
_________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudos are the only way to tell whether my post is useful.

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 27

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 420

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 485

Premium Member
Re: Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2017, 23:35
broall wrote:
Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers have a lower conviction rate than those who rely on court-appointed public defenders. This explains why criminals who commit lucrative crimes like embezzlement or insider trading are more successful at avoiding conviction than are street criminals.

The explanation offered above would be more persuasive if which one of the following were true?

(A) Many street crimes, such as drug dealing, are extremely lucrative and those committing them can afford expensive private lawyers.

(B) Most prosecutors are not competent to handle cases involving highly technical financial evidence and have more success in prosecuting cases of robbery or simple assault.

(C) The number of criminals convicted of street crimes is far greater than the number of criminals convicted of embezzlement or insider trading.

(D) The percentage of defendants who actually committed the crimes of which they are accused is no greater for publicly defended than for privately defended defendants.

(E) Juries, out of sympathy for the victims of crimes, are much more likely to convict defendants accused of violent crimes than they are to convict defendants accused of “victimless” crimes or crimes against property.

Source: LSAT


Going with B on this one.
_________________

- Stne

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 485

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 09 May 2017
Posts: 12

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 6

CAT Tests
Re: Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2017, 05:25
D for this.. Rest of them weaken the argument

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 6

Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 30 Jan 2017
Posts: 81

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 43

Location: India
Schools: ISB '19
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GPA: 3.9
CAT Tests
Re: Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2017, 01:54
broall wrote:
Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers have a lower conviction rate than those who rely on court-appointed public defenders. This explains why criminals who commit lucrative crimes like embezzlement or insider trading are more successful at avoiding conviction than are street criminals.

The explanation offered above would be more persuasive if which one of the following were true?

(A) Many street crimes, such as drug dealing, are extremely lucrative and those committing them can afford expensive private lawyers.

(B) Most prosecutors are not competent to handle cases involving highly technical financial evidence and have more success in prosecuting cases of robbery or simple assault.

(C) The number of criminals convicted of street crimes is far greater than the number of criminals convicted of embezzlement or insider trading.

(D) The percentage of defendants who actually committed the crimes of which they are accused is no greater for publicly defended than for privately defended defendants.

(E) Juries, out of sympathy for the victims of crimes, are much more likely to convict defendants accused of violent crimes than they are to convict defendants accused of “victimless” crimes or crimes against property.

Source: LSAT


We need to make the argument more persuasive i.e we have to establish that expensive private defense lawyers are the primary cause of lower conviction among criminals who commit lucrative crimes.

Option A is weakens the argument. If both street criminals and criminals who commit lucrative crimes can afford expensive lawyers then we cannot conclusively say that expensive private defense lawyers are the primary cause of lower conviction among criminals who commit lucrative crimes.

Option B gives another reason for higher conviction rate among street criminals. Again, this choice weakens the argument that expensive private defense lawyers are the primary cause of lower conviction among criminals who commit lucrative crimes.

Option C talks about the number of criminals convicted. It does not help us strengthen our case that expensive private defense lawyers are the primary cause of lower conviction among criminals who commit lucrative crimes.

Option E gives another reason for higher conviction rate among street criminals. Eliminate for same reason as Option B.

Answer: D

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 43

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 22 Apr 2015
Posts: 29

Kudos [?]: 25 [1], given: 62

WE: Business Development (Internet and New Media)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Oct 2017, 23:46
1
This post received
KUDOS
my logic for D-

the percentage of publicly defended criminals and percentage of privately defended criminals do not vary from each other at large and that's how we can be more persuasive about the private lawyers being the reason behind lower conviction rate among the criminals committing lucrative crimes.

reason behind other options
Option A- Weakens
Option B- prosecutor incompetency is the reason-Weaken
Option C- weaken
Option E- Weaken

Kudos [?]: 25 [1], given: 62

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 07 Jun 2015
Posts: 79

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

WE: Design (Aerospace and Defense)
Re: Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Oct 2017, 03:47
(D) The percentage of defendants who actually committed the crimes of (i think it should be for instead of of)which they are accused is no greater for publicly defended than ..................
I have doubts on the grammar used for option D.

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
G
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1160

Kudos [?]: 1874 [1], given: 449

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Oct 2017, 21:22
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
pkm9995109794 wrote:
(D) The percentage of defendants who actually committed the crimes of (i think it should be for instead of of)which they are accused is no greater for publicly defended than ..................
I have doubts on the grammar used for option D.

"Accuse of" is the correct idiom (though I'm not sure how that's going to help you on CR!). Consider the following example:

    Mike was accused of trespassing on a private beach. - Correct
    Mike was accused for trespassing on a private beach. - Incorrect

That is why they use "of" and not "for" in choice (D). The structure is a bit different, but the idiom is the same.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor at www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Friendly warning: I'm bad at PMs

GMAT Ninja Wednesdays LIVE on YouTube
Join us, and ask your questions in advance!

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99... in any section order

YouTube verbal webinars:
"Next-level" GMAT pronouns | Uses of "that" on the GMAT | Parallelism and meaning | Simplifying GMAT verb tenses | Comparisons, part I |
November webinar schedule

Kudos [?]: 1874 [1], given: 449

Re: Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers   [#permalink] 19 Oct 2017, 21:22
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers

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


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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.