Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
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- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
07 May 2024, 10:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
67% (01:58) correct
33%
(02:07)
wrong
based on 631
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The miscarriage of justice in the Barker case was due to the mistaken views held by some of the forensic scientists involved in the case, who believed that they owed allegiance only to the prosecuting lawyers. Justice was thwarted because these forensic scientists failed to
provide evidence impartially to both the defense and the prosecution. Hence it is not forensic science in general that should be condemned for this injustice.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Most forensic scientists acknowledge a professional obligation to provide evidence impartially to both the defense and the prosecution.
(B) The type of injustice that occurred in the Barker case has occurred in other cases as well.
(C) Most prosecuting lawyers believe that forensic scientists owe a special allegiance to the prosecution.
(D) Many instances of injustice in court cases are not of the same type as that which occurred in the Barker case.
(E) Many forensic scientists do not believe that any miscarriage of justice occurred in the Barker case.
provide evidence impartially to both the defense and the prosecution. Hence it is not forensic science in general that should be condemned for this injustice.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Most forensic scientists acknowledge a professional obligation to provide evidence impartially to both the defense and the prosecution.
(B) The type of injustice that occurred in the Barker case has occurred in other cases as well.
(C) Most prosecuting lawyers believe that forensic scientists owe a special allegiance to the prosecution.
(D) Many instances of injustice in court cases are not of the same type as that which occurred in the Barker case.
(E) Many forensic scientists do not believe that any miscarriage of justice occurred in the Barker case.
08 May 2024, 07:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
Option A works as it is more precise and adds value to the passage/argument and credits the conclusion of the Argument.
11 Feb 2025, 13:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
Justice wasnt served because of FS
FScientists were partial to prosecution
hence F science shouldn't be blamed for this injustice.
A) Most F scientists are impartial, But ONLY in this case they were partial. This means we can blame F science in general, which has always been impartial.
(B) The type of injustice that occurred in the Barker case has occurred in other cases as well.
180" Weaken
(C) Most prosecuting lawyers believe that forensic scientists owe a special allegiance to the prosecution.
what PL believed is irrelevant. we want to show/support if F science has been impartial or not.
(D) Many instances of injustice in court cases are not of the same type as that which occurred in the Barker case.
This is too broad. We don't know if those court cases are even related to forensic science or not. out of scope.
(E) Many forensic scientists do not believe that any miscarriage of justice occurred in the Barker case.
Even I was confused with this option, but re-read this - who believed that they owed allegiance only to the prosecuting lawyers.
They knew they should give the prosecution some levy. also them not believing if there was miscarriage of justice will not support the conclusion which is - forensic science in general that should be condemned for this injustice.
