Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers have a lower conviction rate than those who rely on court-appointed public defenders. This explains why criminals who commit lucrative crimes like embezzlement or insider trading are more successful at avoiding conviction than are street criminals. The explanation offered above would be more persuasive if which one of the following were true? (A) Many street crimes, such as drug dealing, are extremely lucrative and those committing them can afford expensive private lawyers. (B) Must prosecutors are not competent to handle cases involving highly technical financial evidence and have more success in prosecuting cases of robbery or simple assault. (C) The number of criminals convicted of street crimes is far greater than the number of criminals convicted of embezzlement or insider trading- (D) The percentage of defendants who actually committed the crimes of which they are accused is no greater for publicly defended than for privately defended defendants. (E) Juries, out of sympathy for the victims of crimes, are much more likely to convict defendants accused of violent crimes than they are to convict defendants accused of "victimless" crimes or crimes against property.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Option (D) makes the argument more persuasive by suggesting conviction rate differences are lawyer-related.

Step by step solution

01

Understand the Argument

The argument claims that defendants with expensive private lawyers have a lower conviction rate than those with public defenders, which explains why criminals involved in lucrative crimes like embezzlement or insider trading are more successful at avoiding conviction than street criminals.
02

Identify the Type of Evidence Needed

To make the argument more persuasive, we need evidence that supports the specific link between having private lawyers and the lower conviction rate, while possibly ruling out other explanations.
03

Analyze Each Option

Check each option to see if it provides additional evidence to strengthen the original argument: - (A) Suggests that street crime defendants also have access to private lawyers, which contradicts the argument. - (B) Focuses on prosecutor competence, not directly related to lawyer type. - (C) Talks about conviction numbers, but not rates or lawyer types. - (D) Addresses whether guilt rates differ between public and private representation. - (E) Refers to jury sympathy, not lawyer type.
04

Select the Best Supportive Option

Option (D) directly relates to the argument, as it suggests that the difference in conviction rates is not due to the actual guilt of the defendants, but possibly due to the effectiveness of private defense lawyers compared to public defenders.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Legal Reasoning
Legal reasoning is an essential skill for understanding and analyzing legal problems and arguments. It involves using logic, evidence, and principles of law to reach conclusions about legal issues. In the context of the LSAT, legal reasoning involves dissecting arguments to understand their structure and basis. It requires identifying the premises and conclusions and evaluating the logical connections between them.

In the given exercise, the primary legal reasoning task is to determine why defendants with expensive private lawyers have a lower conviction rate compared to those with court-appointed public defenders. This involves assessing whether other factors could influence this disparity in conviction rates, such as the competence of the legal representation or the jury's biases.

One must question whether the premise of the argument is sound and if the evidence provided supports the conclusion adequately. Understanding legal reasoning thus allows one to address potential flaws in the argument and identify the most convincing evidence needed to support it.
Argument Analysis
Argument analysis is an integral part of the LSAT, focusing on evaluating and building arguments logically. To effectively analyze an argument, one must understand its core components: the claim, supporting evidence, and rebuttals or counterclaims.

In this exercise, we begin by breaking down the argument that wealthier defendants with private lawyers have better outcomes in court. An important step is identifying whether the argument provides sufficient evidence to support this claim. This is done by examining each detail or assertion that contributes to the overall argument. In this instance, the question requires identifying additional evidentiary support that makes the argument more persuasive.

Analyzing each answer option reveals that (D) contributes significantly to our understanding by suggesting that the difference in conviction rates is not necessarily due to the actual guilt of the defendants but rather, might be influenced by the effectiveness of legal representation. Here, such an analysis helps determine whether the key assumptions of the argument hold true or whether the argument suffers from a flaw or gap that needs to be addressed.
Logic Skills
Logic skills are the backbone of problem-solving and critical thinking, particularly in the context of LSAT preparation. They help in dissecting arguments and identifying fallacies or weak points.

To enhance logic skills, one must learn to follow the structure of reasoning and detect inconsistencies or misleading conclusions. In the exercise, employing logic skills involves discerning why the explanation that wealthy criminals evade conviction more frequently might hinge on their ability to hire better legal representation.

By examining the logical validity of each potential piece of evidence, candidates practice determining whether the evidence truly supports the contention made. Option (D) illustrates logic skills through its alignment with the argument's core reasoning, thus showing why private lawyers might result in fewer convictions because of their superior skill rather than any other reason. Such skills are indispensable in identifying what truly strengthens an argument and what doesn't.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Scicatific research at a certain university was supported in part by an annual grant from a major foundation. When the university's physics department embarked on weapons-related research, the foundation, which has a purely humanitarian mission, threatened to cancel its grant. The university then promised that none of the foundation's money would be used for the weapons research, whereupon the foundation withdrew its threat, concluding that the weapons research would not benefit from the foundation's grant. Which one of the following describes a flaw in the reasoning underlying the foundation's conclusion? (A) It overlooks the possibility that the availability of the foundation's money for humanitarian uses will allow the university to redirect other funds from humanitarian uses to weapons research. (B) It overlooks the possibility that the physics department's weapons research is not the only one of the university's research activities with other than purely humanitarian purposes. (C) It overlooks the possibility that the university made its promise specifically in order to induce the foundation to withdraw its threat. (D) It confuses the intention of not using a sum of money for a particular purpose with the intention of not using that sum of money at all. (E) It assumes that if the means to achieve an objective are humanitarian in character, then the objective is also humanitarian in character.

According to sources who can be expected to know, Dr. Maria Esposito is going to run in the mayoral election. But if Dr. Esposito runs, Jerome Krasman will certainly not run against her. Therefore Dr. Esposito will be the only candidate in the election. The flawed reasoning in the argument above most closely parallels that in which one of the following? (A) According to its management, Brown's Stores will move next year. Without Brown's being present, no new large store can be attracted to the downtown area. Therefore the downtown area will no longer be viable as a shopping district. (B) The press release says that the rock group Rollercoaster is playing a concert on Saturday. It won't be playing on Friday if it plays on Saturday. So Saturday will be the only day this week on which Rollercoaster will perform. (C) Joshua says the interviewing panel was impressed by Marilyn. But if they were impressed by Marilyn, they probably thought less of Sven. Joshua is probably right, and so Sven will probably not get the job. (D) An informant says that Rustimann was involved in the bank robbery. If Rustimann was involved, Jones was certainly not involved. Since these two are the only people who could have been involved, Rustimann is the only person the police need to arrest. (E) The review said that this book is the best one for beginners at programming. If this book is the best, that other one can't be as good. So this one is the book we should buy.

Comets do not give off their own light but reflect light from other sources, such as the Sun. Scientists estimate the mass of comets by their brightness: the greater a comet's mass, the more light that comet will reflect. A satellite probe, however, has revealed that the material of which Halley's comet is composed reflects 60 times less light per unit of mass than had been previously thought. The statements above, if true, give the most support to which one of the following? (A) Some comets are composed of material that reflects 60 times more light per unit of mass than the material of which Halley's comet is composed. (B) Previous estimates of the mass of Halley's comet which were based on its brightness were too low. (C) The total amount of light reflected from Halley's comet is less than scientists had previously thought. (D) The reflective properties of the material of which comets are composed vary considerably from comet to comet. (E) Scientists need more information before they can make a good estimate of the mass of Halley's comet.

Our tomato soup provides good nutrition: for instance, a warm bowl of it contains more units of vitamin \(C\) than does a serving of apricots or fresh carrots! The advertisement is misleading if which one of the following is true? (A) Few people depend exclusively on apricots and carrots to supply vitamin \(C\) to their diets. (B) A liquid can lose vitamins if it stands in contact with the air for a protracted period of time. (C) Tomato soup contains important nutrients other than vitamin \(C\). (D) The amount of vitamin \(\mathrm{C}\) provided by a serving of the advertised soup is less than the amount furnished by a serving of fresh strawberries. (E) Apricots and fresh carrots are widely known to be nutritious, but their contribution consists primarily in providing a large amount of vita\(\min A\), not a large amount of vitamin \(C\).

Police statistics have shown that automobile antitheft devices reduce the risk of car theft, but a statistical study of automobile theft by the automobile insurance industry claims that cars equipped with antitheft devices are, paradoxically, more likely to be stolen than cars that are not so equipped. Which one of the following. if true, does the most to resolve the apparent paradox? (A) Owners of stolen cars almost invariably report the theft immediately to the police but tend to delay notifying their insurance company, in the hope that the vehicle will be recovered. (B) Most cars that are stolen are not equipped with antitheft devices, and most cars that are equipped with antitheft devices are not stolen. (C) The most common automobile antitheft devices are audible alarms, which typically produce ten false alarms for every actual attempted theft. (D) Automobile owners who have particularly theft-prone cars and live in areas of greatest incidence of car theft are those who are most likely to have antitheft devices installed. (E) Most automobile thefts are the work of professional thieves against whose efforts antitheft devices offer scant protection.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free