标题: 丁丁倒数 80# [打印本页] 作者: 玛莎丁丁 时间: 2012-7-18 23:14 标题: 丁丁倒数 80# Attorneys for a criminal defendant charged that the government, in a coverup, had destroyed evidence that would have supported the defendant in a case. The government replied that there is no evidence that would even tend to support the defendant in the case.
Which one of the following is the most accurate evaluation of the government's reply?
A. It leaves open the question of whether the gov had destroyed such evidence. E. If true, it effectively disproves the charge made on behalf of the defendant.
One of the choices is the OA and the other seems confusing to me. Which one would you guys choose? How to eliminate the other?作者: simonshen 时间: 2012-7-22 18:18
这个答案显然是A嘛。。。 这个政府是在玩文字游戏嘛。他说的是 there IS no evidence that ...，估计他就不敢说there HAS NEVER BEEN evidence that ... 因为如果之前有evidence被毁掉了的话，那there确实is no eveidence，但这可能是因为确实从来没有过evidence，也可能是因为政府把evidence毁掉了，所以现在there is no evidence了，所以这么回答仍然是leave the question open的。而这样解释的话E也肯定就不对了。作者: 玛莎丁丁 时间: 2012-7-22 23:33