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 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
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 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
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.
Updated on: 06 Oct 2025, 10:36
Originally posted by vineetgupta on 22 Jan 2007, 11:18.
Last edited by Bunuel on 06 Oct 2025, 10:36, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by Bunuel on 06 Oct 2025, 10:36, edited 2 times in total.
Formatted
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
34% (02:38) correct
66%
(02:45)
wrong
based on 801
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
When Alicia Green borrowed a neighbor's car without permission, the police merely gave her a warning. However, when Peter Foster did the same thing, he was charged with automobile theft. Peter came to the attention of the police because the car he was driving was hit by a speeding taxi. Alicia was stopped because the car she was driving had defective taillights. It is true that the car Peter took got damaged and the car Alicia took did not, but since it was the taxi that caused the damage this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior. Therefore, Alicia should also have been charged with automobile theft.
If all of the claims offered in support of the conclusion are accurate, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:
(A) The interests of justice would have been better served if the police had released Peter Foster with a warning.
(B) Alicia Green had never before driven a car belonging to someone else without first securing the owner's permission.
(C) Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light, whereas Alicia Green drove with extra care to avoid drawing the attention of the police to the car she had taken.
(D) Alicia Green barely missed hitting a pedestrian when she sped through a red light ten minutes before she was stopped by the police for driving a car that had defective taillights.
(E) Peter Foster had been cited for speeding twice in the preceding month, whereas Alicia Green had never been cited for a traffic violation.
If all of the claims offered in support of the conclusion are accurate, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:
(A) The interests of justice would have been better served if the police had released Peter Foster with a warning.
(B) Alicia Green had never before driven a car belonging to someone else without first securing the owner's permission.
(C) Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light, whereas Alicia Green drove with extra care to avoid drawing the attention of the police to the car she had taken.
(D) Alicia Green barely missed hitting a pedestrian when she sped through a red light ten minutes before she was stopped by the police for driving a car that had defective taillights.
(E) Peter Foster had been cited for speeding twice in the preceding month, whereas Alicia Green had never been cited for a traffic violation.
Every choice seems out of the scope to me...How to solve this??
10 Feb 2016, 21:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
Vyshak
Hi Vyshak,
firstly It is a tough Q and easy to error if we donot get the crux of the Q..
1) What is the question asking us to do? (My thinking is that the question is asking us to pick an answer which cannot be true in the occurred order of events)
The entire events/statements in PARA are TRUE. We are to find which does not fall into 'could be true'
this means " all choices can be true unless it CONTRADICTS the info provided in the Para
2) Can you please explain why C is the correct answer and not E?[/quote]
If you follow all choices can be true unless it CONTRADICTS the info provided in the Para, you can come to correct choice
what info is correct as per para..
1. the police merely gave Alicia a warning.
2. Peter Foster did the same thing and was charged with automobile theft.
3. Peter came to the attention of the police because the car he was driving was hit by a speeding taxi.
4.Alicia was stopped because the car she was driving had defective taillights.
5.It is true that the car Peter took got damaged and the car Alicia took did not, but since it was the taxi that caused the damage this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior.
CONCLUSION:- Therefore, Alicia should also have been charged with automobile theft
(C) Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light, whereas Alicia Green drove with extra care to avoid drawing the attention of the police to the car she had taken.
If this is TRUE, Peter was to be blamed for the accident as he was crossing the red light, BUT this goes against what (5) tells us "since it was the taxi that caused the damage this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior. "
so only one can be TRUE : C or point 5.. but we are told 5 is true, so C is wrong
(E) Peter Foster had been cited for speeding twice in the preceding month, whereas Alicia Green had never been cited for a traffic violation.
We cannot fight the authencity of this info, as there is nothing given in the para about it
Hope it helped
12 Apr 2021, 08:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
vineetgupta
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
(A) No. This is the point of the passage: that the punishment was not equitable.
(B) No. Since this is independent of what is stated in the passage, whether it is true or false does not affect the truth of the passage.
(C) Yes. The passage states that “the taxi … caused the damage” and asserts that there was no difference in the blameworthiness of Peter and Alicia. However, this would be incorrect if Alicia was driving with extra caution while Peter was driving recklessly.
(D) No. Since this is independent of what is stated in the passage, whether it is true or false does not affect the truth of the passage.
(E) No. Since this is independent of what is stated in the passage, whether it is true or false does not affect the truth of the passage.
