LSAT-7-1-19

dalunzi

Question 18 – 19

When Alicia Green borrowed a neighbor’s car without permission, the police merely gave her a warning. However, when Peter Foster did the same thing, he was charged with automobile theft. Peter came to the attention of the police because the car he was driving was hit by a speeding taxi. Alicia was stopped because the car she was driving had defective taillights. It is true that the car Peter took got damaged and the car Alicia took did not, but since it was the taxi that caused the damage this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior. Therefore, Alicia should also have been charged with automobile theft.

19. If all of the claims offered in support of the conclusion are accurate, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:

(A) The interests of justice would have been better served if the police had released Peter Foster with a warning.

(B) Alicia Green had never before driven a car belonging to someone else without first securing the owner’s permission.

(C) Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light, whereas Alicia Green drove with extra care to avoid drawing the attention of the police to the car she had taken.

(D) Alicia Green barely missed hitting a pedestrian when she sped through a red light ten minutes before she was stopped by the police for driving a car that had defective taillights.

(E) Peter Foster had been cited for speeding twice in the preceding month, whereas Alicia Green had never been cited for a traffic violation.

没明白什么意思。结论是两人应该受到同样惩罚因为行为性质是一样的。而BE的意思是说Alicia应该从轻处理。A是支持主结论的。答案C是因为Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light与原文中since it was the taxi that caused the damage 不符而成为答案的吗？那BED做何解释？

chelseayang

"this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior"----from this sentence we can conclude that (C) cannot be true. (c indicates that Peter should be more blameworthy)

B, D,E talk about other incidents involving Peter and Alicia. They could be true, because they do not affect the trufulness of the facts stated in the stimulus

ethyl

感觉这里的“this difference ”用的很诡异

beautyup

我的理解是：C）中Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light, （说明Peter没有做贼心虚）whereas Alicia Green drove with extra care to avoid drawing the attention of the police to the car she had taken.（说明Alicia做贼心虚,躲避警察检查）所以，和原文矛盾，是CANNOT BE TRUE

呵呵

xjlv128

还是不懂啊

xieyongrenren

明白了  Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light, whereas Alicia Green drove with extra care to avoid drawing the attention of the police to the car she had taken.  说明peter的行为很恶劣。所以应该重罚。与原文的not different 不同。

zxzhyzcy

以下是引用chelseayang在2004-12-12 1:29:00的发言：

"this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior"----from this sentence we can conclude that (C) cannot be true. (c indicates that Peter should be more blameworthy)

B, D,E talk about other incidents involving Peter and Alicia. They could be true, because they do not affect the trufulness of the facts stated in the stimulus

明白了~谢谢哦~