PrepTest 109 - Section 2 - Passage 4 - Question 25

Hide analysis

By the time Bentham turned his interest to the subject, late in the eighteenth century, most components of modern evidence law had been assembled. ███

Intro to Topic · Modern evidence law

Historical Example · Parties to a case cannot testify

E.g., a defendant in a criminal case had no right to testify. This rule has been abandoned.

████████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████████ ████ ████████████ ███ ██ █████ ████████ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ███ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ████ ███ █████████ ██ █████ █████████ ████████ █████████ ███████ ██ ████ ████████ ████████ ███████ ████████ ███ █████████ ████████ ███████ ██████ ███████ █████ ███ ██ ███████████████ ███ ████ ████████ ███ ████████████ ████████ ████ █████ ████████████ ██████████ ████ ████ ████████ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ██████ ███████ █████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ████ ████████ ███████ ████ ████ ██████

Historical Context · Exclusionary rules were typical and over-applied

Usually based on rational grounds. But mechanically and hence over-applied.

Consequence / Problem · Obscured truth

As a consequence of exclusionary rules, truth would not emerge from trials.

Bentham's Solution · Inclusion is the rule, exclusion is the exception

If relevant, then include. Narrow exceptions made for exclusion. Flips the status quo of evidence law (exclusion rule, inclusion exception) on its head.

Problem / Critique · Some types of evidence are inherently unreliable

For example, interested-party testimony and hearsay evidence.

███████ ██████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ███████████ ███ ██ ██████ █████████ ██ ██████████ ███

Solution / Rebuttal · Let the jury decide

███ ████ █████████ ████████ █████████ ██ ████████ ████ ██████ ██ ███████ █ █████ ████ ███████ ████ █ ████ ████ ███

Problem / Critique · Some relevant evidence is more likely to produce false verdict

Example · Evidence of defendant's past bank robberies

Sure, it's relevant. But it also prejudices the jury (meaning it makes jury think that being a bank-robber is in his character) and so hurts the jury's ability to decide correctly in this case.

Problem / Critique · Bentham's exceptions are inconsistently applied

Bentham concedes that there can be other values more important than admitting relevant evidence. That's why he excludes sacramental confessions. Okay, but that same reason should also apply to exclude other privileged communications.

███████ ████████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ████████ ███ █████ ██ ███████ ████ █████ █████████ ██████ ████████ ████████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██████ █████ ███ █████ ███████ ██ ██████ ███ █████████ ███ ████ █████████████ ███████ ██████ ████ ██████████ ████ ███████ █████ ████ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ███████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████████ ██████████ ███████ ████ █ ████ ██ █ ████████████

Consequence · Bentham's principle prevails

Despite the concerns raise, Bentham's idea of admitting evidence by default and excluding evidence only when there are clear reasons for doing so is now the standard.

Passage Style

Critique or debate

Problem-analysis

25.

The author mentions "conversations between ██████ ███████ ███ █████ ████████ █████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██████████ ████ ████████ ██ █████ ██

Question Type

Purpose in context (of word, phrase, or idea)

Structure

Make sure to read the surrounding lines to help understand the purpose of this example. Before mentioning social workers and their clients, the author points out that Bentham allowed some exceptions to his nonexclusionary rule. Although under the rule, all relevant evidence should be admissible, Bentham conceded that some kinds of evidence, such as sacramental confessions should be inadmissible, because of competing social interests. The author brings up social workers and their clients as another circumstance in which competing social interests would seem to justify making relevant evidence inadmissible.

suggest a situation ██ █████ ███████████ ██ ███ ████████████ █████████ ███ ██ ████████████

This best captures the purpose as explained above. Bentham’s rule is the “nonexclusion principle.” The author suggests we might not want to apply this rule to conversations between social workers and their clients.

61%

cite an example ██ ██████████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ████████ ██████

We don’t know that these objections “were raised” to Bentham’s proposed reform. P4 describes the author’s own criticism; but the author never indicates whether people at the time Bentham’s rule was being considered also raised these same criticisms.

10%

illustrate the conflict ███████ █████████ ██████ █████████

The purpose relates to how Bentham’s nonexclusionary rule should apply. Although the author would acknowledge that there are competing social interests, this isn’t why the author brings up the example.

18%

demonstrate the difference ███████ ██████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██████

The purpose relates to how Bentham’s nonexclusionary rule should apply. Also, it’s not clear how conversations between social workers and their clients illustrate the difference between interests and values.

emphasize that Bentham's ██████████ ██ ███ ████████████ █████████ ███████ █ ████ █████ ██ ██████████

Actually, Bentham’s exceptions to the nonexclusion principle did not include conversations between social workers and clients. The author’s point at the end of P4 is that Bentham’s reasoning for allowing some exceptions justified allowing other exceptions that he did not actually allow.

PrepTest 109 - Section 2 - Passage 4 - Question 25

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Confirm action