ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1245|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

LSAT-23-4-5 好多个that....

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-9-10 23:10:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-23-4-5 好多个that....

5.     Attorneys for a criminal defendant charged that the government, in a cover-up, had destroyed evidence that 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 government had destroyed such evidence.



(B) It establishes that the attorneys’ charge is an exaggeration.



(C) It shows that the attorneys did not know whether their charge was true.



(D) It demonstrates the government’s failure to search for evidence in its files.A



(E) If true, it effectively disproves the charge made on behalf of the defendant.




看不太懂  没有思路   有人可以讲解一下吗




感谢!!



沙发
发表于 2004-9-11 00:42:00 | 只看该作者

原文(你漏了不少):Attorneys for a criminal defendant charged that the government, in a cover-up, 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.

1。这种题和通常意义上的EVALUATION不同,它要你对政府的回答作出评价。实际上是考你对政府的回答的理解。

2。原文说被告律师声称政府秘密销毁有利于被告的证据,政府回答说没有证据支持被告。政府的回答有两种含义:一是律师的声明没有证据;二是证据被销毁了,就再也没证据支持被告了。所以实际没明确回答律师的声明,即A

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-9-11 00:57:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-23-4-5 好多个that....

thanks , lawyer !!


我的题目是从置顶的 [下载]目前最全的GMAT逻辑复习材料


下载的   需要通知相关人员做更改吗?

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

所属分类: 法学院申请

近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-1-6 04:05
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部