Reading comp PrepTest 116 · Section 4 · Question 7

Passage

Questions 1-7  .        Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that  . the clients they defend are innocent Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal Studies


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Some legal scholars' answer: Provide best defense to accused, even if believe guilty
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Question posed: "Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that the clients they defend are innocent of the charges against them?" (lines 1-3)
    • The framing of the first view coming from "some legal scholars" will likely be contrasted by an alternative view (the author's, possibly)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's answer: If certain def. is guilty, argue for leniency rather than make false claims
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • "Shift" language: "But" (line 20)
    • List, item 1: Obligation to defendant (lines 21-22)
    • List, item 2: Obligation to court and society (lines 22-23)
    • Author's attitude: "lawyers … should not, as officers of the court, present to the court assertions they know to be false" (lines 23-25)
    • Author's attitude: "lawyers who are convinced that their clients are guilty should not undertake to demonstrate their innocence" (lines 26-28)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's conclusion: Lawyers advocate defendant's rights based on facts of case
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's attitude: "ultimately benefits" (line 43), "can only truly be provided" (line 44)
    • Expanding initial answer to broader point about selecting cases and rights depending on facts of case

Main Point: While defense lawyers have a duty to their clients, their duty to the court and society requires them to modify their advocacy based on the facts of a case.

Key Lines?

Lines 1-3: Question posed

Lines 3-7: Some legal scholars' answer

Lines 20-23: Author's support (duty to court/society)

Lines 26-28: Author's answer

Lines 46-51: Author's conclusion that defense attorneys should decide whether and how to advocate for defendants' rights based on facts of case

Meta-Structure?

Question/Answer: This passage utilizes the Question/Answer Meta-Structure. Most of these passages follow a predictable formula. A question is posed early on, and the rest of the passage attempts to answer that question. In that case, the main point of the passage is simply the answer to the question with which the author agrees. (For the odd passage in which the author doesn't express approval over any answer, the main point is simply a summary of the various answers).

In this particular passage, the question is, "Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that the clients they defend are innocent of the charges against them?" We first hear from legal scholars who answer that question with an unequivocal, "No." But then the author provides a more nuanced answer in the second paragraph. The author postulates that defense lawyers have duties to the court and society, in addition to their clients. From this, the author concludes that defense lawyers who are certain their clients are guilty shouldn't attempt to prove their clients' innocence. Instead, they should present any mitigating evidence to justify more lenient sentencing.

So, that answer is the main point, right? Well, not quite. This passage takes a unique turn in the final paragraph. There, the author expands the initial inquiry and draws a more general conclusion. In the third paragraph — still using that duty to the court and society as premise (lines 42-45) — the author concludes that defense lawyers might not need to take every case offered. Perhaps a defense lawyers don't need to represent people they know are guilty. Finally, the author prescribes that lawyers' advocacy for defendants depends "on facts of the case." (lines 46-51). So the main point is that defense lawyers' duty to the courts and society requires these lawyers to consider the facts of the case before determining how (and whether) they should advocate for their defendants.

Last Thoughts?

The last paragraph takes a surprising turn, given the structure of this passage, so we expect several questions relating to the author's conclusion there. Further, the lawyer's duty "to the court, and by extension, to society" comes up several times and is a key piece of evidence in both the author's paragraph two answer and the author's paragraph three conclusion, so we expect a question or two about that as well.

(Also, perhaps it bears mentioning that this author's view is not the mainstream view in U.S. jurisprudence, and this article may very well be taken from another country. We only mention this because you're probably going to learn something different from this if you go to law school in the U.S.)

Question prompt

The primary purpose of Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Review the main point and any primary Meta-Structures, then find an answer that best captures the latter with the details from the former

Answer Anticipation

A question that asks for a passage's "primary purpose" is asking us to select the answer choice that describes why the author wrote the passage. The correct answer will describe an action: what the author hoped to do in the passage, and how the author accomplished that.Now, in a broad sense, every author hopes to convince us that the main point is true. However, different authors employ different means to convince us of that main point. That's why the passage's Meta-Structure can be revealing: it helps us predetermine how this specific author was attempting to convey the main point.In this case, the central Meta-Structure was Question/Answer. We were given two answers to the central question of "Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that the clients they defend are innocent of the charges against them?" We first hear from legal scholars who answer that question with an unequivocal, "No." But then the author provides a more nuanced answer in the second and third paragraphs. The author ultimately concludes defense lawyers' duty to the courts and society requires these lawyers to consider the facts of the case before determining how (and whether) they should advocate for their defendants. So, the primary purpose of this passaage is to provide a nuanced, alternative answer to the question of "Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that the clients they defend are innocent of the charges against them?" — one that takes into account lawyers' ethical duties to the court and society.

Answer choices

  1. A
    show that ethical dilemmas Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) This answer choice may be very tempting, but it is not correct. Although the author brings up "ethical dilemmas," the purpose of this passage was not merely to assert how these dilemmas "complicate the defense lawyer's role." The author's ultimate goal is to argue that lawyers should act in a certain way, based on their ethical duties to the client, court, and society. The author doesn't merely want to argue that "it's complicated" to be an attorney. Remember, the Meta-Structure of this passage is Question/Answer. We know that the author provides an answer to an issue, while this answer choice makes it seem like the author just wanted to describe an issue.

  2. B
    argue that the defense Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem

    (B) This answer choice gets closest to our prediction, and it is correct. This answer choice may not explicitly state that the author provides a nuanced, alternative answer to the question of "Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that the clients they defend are innocent of the charges against them?" However, by contrasting "the lawyer's duty to the court and society" with that duty to the client, this answer choice hints towards the alternative answer the author provides. Moreover, this captures the author's main point. The author does believe that the duty to the court and society "complements effective legal representation" of the client. The author even states that a lawyer balancing these potentially-conflicting obligations "ultimately benefits the defendant" (lines 42-46). Although this answer choice may not align exactly with our anticipation, it gets the closest among these answer choices and is therefore correct.

  3. C
    explain why the actual Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) An efficient test-taker would eliminate this answer choice righ away, as this is contrary to the author's main point. The author believes the client's guilt or innocence should affect whether and how an attorney will represent the client, so the author thinks this issue should be of much importance to defense attorneys.

  4. D
    discuss some of the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) This may be a tempting answer choice, but it is incorrect. Part of the passage discusses "some of the issues that a defense lawyer must resolve prior to accepting the case." According to the author, the lawyer must thoroughly analyze facts before deciding whether the "merits of the case" will allow the lawyer to represent the defendant (lines 43-49). But the author makes other points as well. The author also argues about lawyers' duty to society and the court and claims that attorneys shouldn't argue in favor of guilty clients' innocence (and should instead present mitigating circumstances and argue for leniency). The author also makes a more general conclusion at the end of the passage (lines 49-51). Because this answer choice captures only part of the author's argument, it is incorrect.

  5. E
    reveal how the practice Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) While answer choice (D) was more specific than the author's argument, this answer choice is far more general than the author's argument. The author never makes any claims about the "values and principles of democratic societies" in general or whether the practice of law strengthens those. The author only addresses one issue within the practice of law, so this answer choice is incorrect.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 14%
  2. B Credited 78%
  3. C 2%
  4. D 7%
  5. E 0%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion