Witness testimony: Around 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6, I

Question

Witness testimony: Around 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6, I saw a man exit from the back entrance of the building. I knew it was McGregor by the man’s height and his long, slightly awkward steps, and from the fact that he was wearing a hat—possibly a baseball cap. McGregor always seemed to be wearing some kind of hat. On Tuesdays there are always several groundskeepers scheduled to work on the grounds, and he would very likely have been scheduled that day.

Select  Assumes to be true  for the statement that describes something the testimony implies the witness assumes to be true, and select  Assumes to be false  for the statement that describes something the testimony implies the witness assumes to be false. Make only two selections, one in each column.

KarishmaB · Accepted Answer

Around 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6, I saw a man exit from the back entrance of the building.

I knew it was McGregor by the man’s height and his long, slightly awkward steps, and from the fact that he was wearing a hat—possibly a baseball cap.

Assumption in this statement:
McGregor has a distinctive height, way of walking and tendency to wear hats. That is how I knew it was McGregor.
This is not mentioned but we can infer it.

McGregor always seemed to be wearing some kind of hat.

On Tuesdays there are always several groundskeepers scheduled to work on the grounds, and he would very likely have been scheduled that day.

McGregor was the only groundskeeper scheduled to work at the building on Tuesday, July 6.

The witness says "On Tuesdays there are always several groundskeepers scheduled to work on the grounds and he would very likely have been scheduled."
He is assuming that "McGregor was the only groundskeeper scheduled to work that day" is False. We can infer it. He says that several groundskeepers are scheduled to work every Tuesday and Mc G would have been scheduled too.

ANSWER: Assumes to be false

McGregor exited the rear of the building in question alone at 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.

There is no mention of whether he assumes that Mc G exited alone or not. The witness says that he saw a man exit. The witness doesn't say that he saw a man exit alone. It is possible that a woman exited too for example, but the witness did not see her. Or even if he did, it is irrelevant to the case at hand so he did not mention it.

McGregor was scheduled to work at the building on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.

The witness mentions "he would very likely have been scheduled to work at the grounds that day." He is not assuming that he was scheduled to work that day. He says he was very likely to have been scheduled. 
Had the witness said something like "Mc G missed his work shift at the grounds on Tuesday," then we would have known that the witness is assuming that Mc G was scheduled to work on Tuesday. 
 sv2023 
​​​​​​​
  McGregor’s height, way of walking, and tendency to wear hats distinguish him from the other groundskeepers.

As mentioned above in bold. It is ann assumption the witness makes.

ANSWER - Assumes to be true

McGregor often wore a baseball cap prior to the morning of Tuesday, July 6.

The witness doesn't assume anything about the baseball cap - whether he has worn it before or not worn it before. He just says that McGregor always seemed to be wearing some kind of hat.

anish777 · Answer

Hello
I need an expert's opinion on this. Is it because in the testimony, the person is not sure McGregor was scheduled to work on that day (he would very likely have been scheduled that day) makes the option "McGregor was scheduled to work at the building on the morning of Tuesday, July 6." wrong?
And is it because the person could reach to the conclusion that it was McGregor just by noticing his cap and his height, makes the 4th option correct?
 chetan2u 
 Bunuel

chetan2u · Answer

Yes, you are correct. We are looking at word 'implies', so the information in the para should imply that the witness assumes it to be true.

"McGregor was scheduled to work at the building on the morning of Tuesday, July 6": As correctly pointed out by you, the witness is not 100% sure on whether McGregor was scheduled to work that day. He just connects his impression of what he saw in the morning to a likelihood of McGregor being on work that day.

Now, in the sentence, "I knew it was McGregor by the man’s height and his long, slightly awkward steps,", he is 100% sure that it is McGregor. ...Correct for assumes to be true.

Of course, the wearing of hat plays a role in his testimony, and the hat being base ball cap has no role as McGregor was known to wear different types of caps. He may or may not have worn the base ball cap earlier. This negates the option that talks of hat

For sure, assumes to be false is an easy one, as teh first option directly contradicts the statement made by witness.

zfu4820 · Answer

Assume to be true: 
locate the sentence that "I knew it was McGregor by the man’s height and his long, slightly awkward steps, and from the fact that he was wearing a hat", the witness assumes that he can distinguish McGregor from the other groundskeepers by his height, way of walking, and tendency to wear hats.

Assume to be false: 
located the sentence that 'On Tuesdays there are always several groundskeepers scheduled to work on the grounds, and he would very likely have been scheduled that day.', it assumes that he was not alone / the only groundskeeper.

yugam07 · Answer

Witness says, "I saw a man...", Can't we conclude that the witness assumnes the man was alone by purview of the fact that it said, 'a man'?

cheshire · Answer

Just because the witness says  "a man" , it does not mean they assume:
 
 The man exited  alone , or 
 No one else was nearby or exiting before/after him.  
The phrase  "a man"  simply describes who the witness saw, not the full context.

In fact, it's something they likely assume to be false or irrelevant; because their identification depends only on recognizable traits, not exclusivity of presence.

AnkitNandwani1 · Answer

Understanding the Testimony
 
 Witness says they  saw a man exit  at ~8:00am July 6. 
 They  identified him as McGregor  because of:
 
 his height 
 awkward way of walking 
 wearing a hat (often a baseball cap)  
 
 Tuesdays → always several groundskeepers scheduled → likely McGregor was scheduled.  
So the witness  assumes certain things are true  and also  rules out other possibilities  to conclude it was McGregor they saw.

Evaluate Each Statement
Let’s check each option in the table:
   Statement 
 TRUE or FALSE? 
 Why 
 
   McGregor was the only groundskeeper scheduled to work at the building on Tuesday, July 6.  
 FALSE 
 Witness never says McGregor was the  only  one. In fact, they mention “several groundskeepers.” If McGregor were the only one, it would be easier to ID him. The witness implicitly assumes this is false. 
 
   McGregor exited the rear of the building in question alone at 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.  
 FALSE 
 Witness didn’t say McGregor was alone. Not necessary for the identification. Doesn’t match an assumption explicitly. 
 
   McGregor was scheduled to work at the building on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.  
 TRUE 
 Witness says he’d “very likely have been scheduled.” Identification hinges partly on assuming McGregor was supposed to be there. 
 
   McGregor’s height, way of walking, and tendency to wear hats distinguish him from the other groundskeepers.  
 TRUE 
 Absolutely crucial. Witness uses these physical traits to conclude it was McGregor. Must assume they’re distinctive. 
 
   McGregor often wore a baseball cap prior to the morning of Tuesday, July 6.  
 TRUE 
 Also assumed true because witness says McGregor “always seemed to be wearing some kind of hat.” Helps ID him.

We need to  pick one “Assumes to be true”  and one “Assumes to be false.” The best are:
 Assumes to be true: 
 →  McGregor’s height, way of walking, and tendency to wear hats distinguish him from the other groundskeepers. 
Because otherwise, the witness couldn’t reliably conclude it was McGregor.
 Assumes to be false: 
 →  McGregor was the only groundskeeper scheduled to work at the building on Tuesday, July 6. 
Because the testimony says there are  always several  groundskeepers scheduled. The witness assumes McGregor wasn’t the only one, so identification is based on appearance, not exclusivity.

GMAT1034 · Answer

How is A an assumption, isnt it already stated in the Q stem that : Several people work on Tuesdays, so Mr. Gregor cant work alone on Tuesdays, and an assumption should be unstated. Could you please clarify?  KarishmaB   MartyMurray

MartyMurray · Answer

Good point.

(A) isn't exactly an assumption. It's more something that can be inferred to be false.

At the same time, since (A) is the only choice that clearly conflicts with the testimony, we can safely choose it for Assumes to be false.

bumpbot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club BumpBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

Witness testimony: Around 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6, I

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

Assumes to be true	Assumes to be false
		McGregor was the only groundskeeper scheduled to work at the building on Tuesday, July 6.
		McGregor exited the rear of the building in question alone at 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.
		McGregor was scheduled to work at the building on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.
		McGregor’s height, way of walking, and tendency to wear hats distinguish him from the other groundskeepers.
		McGregor often wore a baseball cap prior to the morning of Tuesday, July 6.

Statement	TRUE or FALSE?	Why
McGregor was the only groundskeeper scheduled to work at the building on Tuesday, July 6.	FALSE	Witness never says McGregor was the only one. In fact, they mention “several groundskeepers.” If McGregor were the only one, it would be easier to ID him. The witness implicitly assumes this is false.
McGregor exited the rear of the building in question alone at 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.	FALSE	Witness didn’t say McGregor was alone. Not necessary for the identification. Doesn’t match an assumption explicitly.
McGregor was scheduled to work at the building on the morning of Tuesday, July 6.	TRUE	Witness says he’d “very likely have been scheduled.” Identification hinges partly on assuming McGregor was supposed to be there.
McGregor’s height, way of walking, and tendency to wear hats distinguish him from the other groundskeepers.	TRUE	Absolutely crucial. Witness uses these physical traits to conclude it was McGregor. Must assume they’re distinctive.
McGregor often wore a baseball cap prior to the morning of Tuesday, July 6.	TRUE	Also assumed true because witness says McGregor “always seemed to be wearing some kind of hat.” Helps ID him.

GMAT Two-part Analysis (TPA) Questions

Witness testimony: Around 8:00 on the morning of Tuesday, July 6, I

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