PrepTest 146
[lcid:3683] Prep Test 146 LSAT — Reading Comp — S4
Reading comp
Passage
Passage A . Jury nullification occurs when the jury acquits the . defendant in a criminal case in disregard of
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Legal Studies
Passage A
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Passage A - Jury nullification, while probably rare, creates many problems for criminal law.
Passage B - While jury nullification has the potential to be done for the wrong reasons, that's probably rare, and it solves a lot of problems with law enforcement and for the legislature.
Key Lines:
Passage A:
Lines 8-10 - The Author's opinion is stated
Line 11 - A problem is described
Line 17-18 - A problem is described
Lines 25-28 - A problem is described
Lines 30-32 - The Author's opinion is reiterated
Passage B:
Lines 36-40 - A benefit is noted by the Author
Lines 41-43 - Another benefit is noted
Lines 51-53 - Another benefit is noted
Lines 54-56 - A problem is noted that is said to be rare
Meta-Structure - Relationship Between Passages:
List of Problems (Passage A) - The Author starts the passage out with a statement that a certain practice has problems, and then she goes through a list of those problems. Note that our Key Lines for this list generally featured the first line of each statement, but it didn't always. Being able to identify the "best" line summing up each problem is a key way to be able to really understand these passages!
List of Benefits (Passage B) - In a mirrored structure to Passage A, Passage B notes that the same practice has benefits, and then it goes about listing those benefits. This mirrored structure reflects their opposite opinions of jury nullification.
Which brings us to the relationship between the passages. They both use a similar structure to make opposite arguments. In Passage A, problems with jury nullification are noted. In Passage B, the benefits of jury nullification are described. These problems and benefits aren't perfectly mirrored—Passage B doesn't address each downside in Passage A by suggesting that it's actually a benefit—but they do overlap in discussing the role of the legislature in the criminal justice system.
Last Thoughts:
Since the passages reach different conclusions, we should expect questions about differences between them, and answers that reflect differences. The exception to that is any question about Argument Structure or Methods of Reasoning since the way that they make their arguments is actually quite similar.
Passage A
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- A problematic phenomenon is introduced
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Jury nullification - Jury thinks someone is guilty but say innocent (mercy, dislike of victim, civil disobedience)
- Probably rare, but problematic
- Paragraph note
- First problem noted (No reasoning)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Juries don't release reasoning, so don't know how often and how used
- Paragraph note
- Second problem noted (Not all info)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Juries don't have full knowledge (e.g., prior crimes)
- Paragraph note
- Third problem noted (Unaccountable)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Legislature passes laws; judges interpret
- Jury not accountable, so don't need to think of overall effect
- Paragraph note
- Wrap up
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Disagreement over criminal law should happen in public, not in jury box
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- Benefit of nullification (Protect against overzealous prosecution)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Police and prosecutors sometimes "overzealous"
- Jury nullification can protect against this
- Paragraph note
- Another benefit of nullification (Help legislature)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Legislature makes general/broad because they can't cover all cases or make everyone happy
- Nullification helps legislature
- Paragraph note
- Another benefit of nullification (Tell legislature the law is bad)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- More help for legislatures - send message that law has a problem with it
- Paragraph note
- Problem with nullification (bad reasoning); frequency is discussed
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Problem - Might be based on bad reasoning
- Frequency of problem - Rare, since all 12 have to agree to nullify
Passage A - Jury nullification, while probably rare, creates many problems for criminal law.
Passage B - While jury nullification has the potential to be done for the wrong reasons, that's probably rare, and it solves a lot of problems with law enforcement and for the legislature.
Key Lines:
Passage A:
Lines 8-10 - The Author's opinion is stated
Line 11 - A problem is described
Line 17-18 - A problem is described
Lines 25-28 - A problem is described
Lines 30-32 - The Author's opinion is reiterated
Passage B:
Lines 36-40 - A benefit is noted by the Author
Lines 41-43 - Another benefit is noted
Lines 51-53 - Another benefit is noted
Lines 54-56 - A problem is noted that is said to be rare
Meta-Structure - Relationship Between Passages:
List of Problems (Passage A) - The Author starts the passage out with a statement that a certain practice has problems, and then she goes through a list of those problems. Note that our Key Lines for this list generally featured the first line of each statement, but it didn't always. Being able to identify the "best" line summing up each problem is a key way to be able to really understand these passages!
List of Benefits (Passage B) - In a mirrored structure to Passage A, Passage B notes that the same practice has benefits, and then it goes about listing those benefits. This mirrored structure reflects their opposite opinions of jury nullification.
Which brings us to the relationship between the passages. They both use a similar structure to make opposite arguments. In Passage A, problems with jury nullification are noted. In Passage B, the benefits of jury nullification are described. These problems and benefits aren't perfectly mirrored—Passage B doesn't address each downside in Passage A by suggesting that it's actually a benefit—but they do overlap in discussing the role of the legislature in the criminal justice system.
Last Thoughts:
Since the passages reach different conclusions, we should expect questions about differences between them, and answers that reflect differences. The exception to that is any question about Argument Structure or Methods of Reasoning since the way that they make their arguments is actually quite similar.
Question prompt
The author of passage
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: E
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Legal
Answer choices
-
Acomplicated
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. Passage B never mentions the complexity of laws. -
Bantiquated
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. Passage B never says that certain laws are antiquated. -
Cpermissive
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. This answer doesn't even make sense! Jury nullification is when the jury refuses to convict someone even though they're guilty. It makes no sense for them to do so because a law allows people to do too much. -
Dintrusive
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. Passage B doesn't talk about the intrusiveness of laws. -
Egeneral
Why choice E matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True
Strategy Overview:
Review what Passage B said about laws and the justification for nullification
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
Looking at our notes for Passage B, we can see that Paragraphs 2 and 3 were about benefits of jury nullification that had to do with the legislature/laws, so we should check those two places.
In Paragraph 2, the Author notes that jury nullification helps legislatures because some laws are general and haven't covered all cases, or broad so they get enough support to pass.
In Paragraph 3, the Author notes that jury nullification helps legislatures by sending a message that the people view a law as unjust.
So three potential answers come from the review of the passage—jury nullification is beneficial because some laws are too general, too broad, or too unjust. Though that third one sounds weird, and it suggests there's an acceptable level of unjustness, so we should expect one of the first two (which are essentially synonymous).
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 38-45) Passage B notes that jury nullification helps the legislature by saying that a "general law[]" shouldn't apply to a particular defendant. This allows the legislature to know that at least one particular variation presents a case where the law shouldn't apply. This answer lines up with the second benefit Passage B notes, so it's correct.
Key Takeaway:
Sometimes, the phrasing of a question stem can give you a hint as to what the correct answer is going to be. While analyzing these answers and finding our anticipated one wasn't hard in this case, it could be in others with longer answers. In those cases, considering the wording of the question stem can save you some time. Here, the question stem asking about certain laws being too __________ told us that the correct answer had to make sense as a finish to that sentence, and we determined that "too unjust" didn't make sense as an answer.
What this tests
Discussion
-
RC PT78 Q#1 1 reply
Started by white101437