Self-study
Support Whoever murdered Jansen was undoubtedly in Jansen's office on the day of the murder, and Support both Samantha and Herbert were in Jansen's office on that day. ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ███ ███████ ███ ██████ █████ ████ █████ ██████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ██ ████████ ███ ███ █████████ ███ █████ ████ ███████ ███████ ██████ ██████████ ██ █████████████ ███ ██████ █████ ████████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ███ ████████████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██ ██ ███ ███ █████████ ████ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ███████
Summary
The author accuses Samantha of murdering Jansen, and the support list is long:
Samantha and Herbert fulfill a requirement of the murderer (in office on that day).
If Samantha is the murderer, the police won’t find her fingerprints or footprints; the police didn’t find her footprints, and we don’t know if they found her fingerprints.
If Herbert is the murderer, the police would’ve found either Herbert’s fingerprints or footprints, but they found neither. From this the author draws a valid sub-conclusion that Herbert is not the murderer.
Using this sub-conclusion, the author concludes that Samantha must be the murderer.
Missing Connection
Herbert’s innocence has been proven, but why is Samantha the only other option? Other people could have been in the office that day. We can’t assume that just because Herbert isn’t guilty, that Samantha is. To do that, we need to know that these are the only two options.
Analysis by TiaraLaulusa
20.
Which one of the following, ██ ████████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ████ ████████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ████████ █████████
a
If there had ████ ██████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ██████ █████ ████ █████ █████
b
Jansen's office was ███ █████ ██ ███ ██████
c
No one but ███████ ███ ████████ ███ ██ ████████ ██████ ██ ███ ███ ██ ███ ███████
d
The fingerprints found ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ███ █████████
e
The fingerprints found ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ███ ███████████