Top Law Schools

secretad wrote:The correct answer is C. I had to guess on this one because I thought all five answer choices could be true in this could be true EXCEPT question.

Answer choice C states that Peter was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light (which could be true) and it states that Alicia drove with extra care to avoid drawing attention, which COULD be true as well! How is this a must be false answer? Just because Alicia was pulled over for defective taillights does not mean that she did not drive it with extra care. She may have had no idea that the taillights were defective. So this could be true.

barnum wrote:The passage states that "the taxi that caused the damage this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior."

In answer choice C it says that Peter ran a red light. That would contradict this in that there would now be reason to place blame on Peter for the damage to the car.

secretad wrote: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:

The correct answer is C:

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.

Cade McNown wrote:you should post the whole stimulus.