求解逻辑题目一枚，复习复习好好地突然瞬间啥都看不懂了

难看的任

Juries in criminal trials do not base verdicts on uncorroborated testimony given by any one witness.Rightly so , because it is usually prudent to be highly skeptical of unsubstantiated claims made by anyone person.But then , to be consistent,juries should end an all-too-common practice :convicting defendants on the basis of an uncorroborated full confession.
Which of following, if ture , most strengthens the argument above?
A:Juries often acquit in cases in which a defendant retracts a full confession made before trial

B:The process of injury seletion is designed to screeen out people who have a firm opinion ablout the defendant's guilt in adance of the trial

C:defendants sometimes make full confession when they did in fact do what they are accused of doing and have come to believe that the prosecutor has compelling proof of this

D:Highly suggestible people who are accused of wrongdoing sometimes become so unsure of their own recollection of the past that they can come to accept the accusations made against them

E:Many people believe that juries should not convict defendants who have no made full confession答案是D求解释！

lainemai

Juries in criminal trials do not base verdicts on uncorroborated testimony given by any one witness.Rightly so , because it is usually prudent to be highly skeptical of unsubstantiated claims made by anyone person.But then , to be consistent,juries should end an all-too-common practice :convicting defendants on the basis of an uncorroborated full confession.
就是说陪审团一般不以那种目击者未经证实的证词来宣判罪名。这样做是因为高度怀疑任何人未经证实的说法的做法是小心谨慎的。但是有的时候，为了一致性，陪审团会经常做出这样常见的举措：为了和未经证实的证词一样去判定被告有罪