PT42 LR2 #8 Forum

[xqhp82]

Hi, could someone explain this question to me, I'm so completely clueless! What exactly is the principle here?

[Anomaly]

Treat these questions just like any other assumption/strengthen. Identify the conclusion and determine exactly how the author arrives at it. Then form your principle prephrase based off of that. For this question, I'm thinking something like "if the evidence against someone is obtained illegally then the person cannot justifiably be punished for their wrongdoings".

This matches up exactly with D. The conservation officer caught Keffner setting illegal traps...but since the conservation officer was trespassing herself when she discovered them, Keffner cannot be justifiably punished.

(A) is completely wrong. First off it concludes that Long is not justified in taking illegal action, which is not the same as taking punitive measures. Furthermore, the reasoning is that Long himself is stealing money from Price, which is also not parallel to the reasoning in the principle.

(B) This is flawed in the same ways as A. Shakira is not justified in reporting him? Moreover, the reasoning is that she also committed the same crime. Not a match.

(C) is wrong because it does not say the evidence was obtained illegally. Takashi caught Sarah on Tuesday, but she violated curfew in an unrelated circumstance on Monday. Perhaps if it said Takashi violated the law on Tuesday when she caught Sarah, then we could consider this choice.

(E) is a different princple. It says the board cannot justifiably punish Ramirez because doing so would be inconsistent with how they treated similar cases in the past.

[xqhp82]

Thanks for the explanation! Now I understand, I misread something in the answer choice. Stupid me!