PrepTest 126

[lcid:3602] Prep Test 126 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Lawyer: This witness acknowledges Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

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

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Strengthen with Sufficient Premise Questions

Stimulus Summary

Witness - “I saw the assault and recognized the assailant, but not the famous victim.”
Lawyer - Since the witness recognizes my unknown client but not the famous victim, his testimony should be excluded.

Answer Anticipation

What is the lawyer basing her argument that a witness’s testimony should be thrown out? That he didn’t recognize a celebrity, but he did recognize the lawyer’s client as the one who assaulted someone. It’s this failure to recognize one of the parties involved in the assault that is used to argue for the exclusion of the testimony.
However, there’s no indication that recognizing everyone involved in a crime - perpetrator, victim - even if one is famous is a requirement for testimony to be considered! It’s possible that such testimony should be admitted, with the jurors deciding how credible it is with only certain parties identified.
The correct answer should therefore establish that failing to recognize everyone involved in a crime should preclude a witness’s testimony from being included.

Answer choices

  1. A
    If a witness claims Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    The witness doesn’t claim to witness both parties here, so this answer is out of scope (it’s a negation of the correct answer).
  2. B
    There are other witnesses Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    The Lawyer’s argument doesn’t discuss other witnesses, and the existence of other witnesses doesn’t speak to whether a different witness’s testimony should be allowed. If anything, this would be a relevant answer in an argument about whether the witness is needed to prove the case.
  3. C
    It is impossible to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    The Lawyer’s argument is based on what the witness claims, not whether that claim is true.
  4. D
    The testimony of a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem
    Testimony should be included → Witness claims to recognize both parties. Taking the contrapositive, we get: ~Witness claims to recognize both parties → Testimony shouldn’t be included. Since the witness from the stimulus claims not to recognize both parties (only one of the two), this answer guarantees his testimony should be excluded, justifying the conclusion.
  5. E
    It is unlikely that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    If anything, this calls the witness’s claim into question. However, two issues. First, it makes it only unlikely that the witness is lying, not certain. Second, even if the witness is lying, there’s no information in the stimulus establishing that as sufficient to guarantee the testimony should be excluded.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion