PT27.S3.Q4 (P1) - Mass media coverage of criminal activities

BigJay20BigJay20 Member
edited January 2021 in Reading Comprehension 443 karma

Could someone explain what I’m not seeing here? While I get why C is right, A is supported as well. The video explanation just ruled it out without offering an explanation.

The question is about what the author will be more like to agree with. A is basically saying that we are unlikely to assemble a jury capable of rendering an impartial decision due to the flaws in voir dire.

The author should agree with this because:
He claims the way the questions are phrased by the judges are problematic
Jurors don’t answer truthfully because they don’t want to participate in jury duty
There are those who overestimate their ignorance of a case.
The entire paragraph is about a judge’ favorite that is flawed-thus making the selection of a jury that will render an impartial decision a daunting task

These are valid reasons to draw such a conclusion-voir dire is flawed in a way that it is unlikely to select a jury that is capable of rendering an impartial decision.

Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-3-passage-1-questions/

Comments

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    Is A supported though? Where is void dire mentioned? It is discussed in the third and fourth paragraphs but be cautious because the opinion given in the third paragraph is the judge's opinion but the question is asking about what the author is likely to agree with. If you take a look in the fourth paragraph, the author says "merely eliminating existing judicial remedies like v.d. DOES NOT really provide a solution to the problem of impartiality." (Line 46-48). C is a nice, soft answer and is supported by the remainder of the 4th paragraph; the author thinks if you have a diverse, opinionated, relatively knowledgeable body of people in the jury, then impartiality is possible. B, D, and E are just not supported.

Sign In or Register to comment.