Self-study
P1
The jury trial is one of the handful of democratic institutions that allow individual citizens, rather than the government, to make important societal decisions. █ ███████ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ ████████ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ████████ ██ █████████ █████ ███ ██████ ████████ ██████ ██ ████████ █████ ████ ████████████ ██████████ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████████ ███ ███████████ ████████ ███ █████ ██████ ██ ██████ █████ ██████ ██ ██████ █████████ ███ █████████ ███████████ ███████ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ █████ ███ █████ ██████ ████████ ███ ████████ ███
Intro to Topic ·
Unanimity as a requirement in jury trials
This requirement compels the jury to deliberate fully and truly before reaching its verdict.
Critics ·
of unanimity
Unanimity can result in hung juries (deadlock) which hampers the judicial system by forcing a retrial. Critics recommend discarding unanimity.
P2
███ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████ ███
Critique (of the Critics) / Main Point ·
The costs of a hung jury do not outweigh the benefits of unanimity
Sounds like the conclusion. Let's see if the author can back up this cost-benefit argument.
Premise 1 ·
Jury trials are rare and hung juries even more rare
Premise 2 ·
Hung juries is not a bad thing; it's a sign that the system is working
P3
█████████ █████████ ████████ █ ██████ ██████ ████ █ ██████ ███ ████ █ ████████ ████ ██ █████ ████████ ██████ ███ ███████ ████████████ ███████████████████ ██ ████ █████ ███████ ██████ ███████ ████ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ███████ ██ █████ ██ ████████ ████████████ ███████████ ███ █████████ ███████████ █████ ████ ████████ ███ ███████████ ███ ████ █████████ ███
Premise 3 ·
Unanimity increases chances of fair verdict
Decreases chances of a false conviction
Premise 4 ·
Dissenting opinion is an important part of the deliberation process
Loss of unanimity will undermine society's confidence in the verdict.
Passage Style
Critique or debate
4.
Which one of the following █████████ █████ ████ █████████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ███ ██ ███ ████ █████████ ██ ███ ████████
Question Type
Implied
This is an Inference question asking for a claim that follows logically from the end of P3. The author ends P3 by
a
It is not ███████████ █████ ████ ███ █████████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████████ ████ ███ ██ █ ████████ █████████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████████
(A) brings in completely new, unrelated ideas. P3 does not mention critics of the unanimity requirement, nor does it mention the traditions that the different perspectives came from.
b
Similarly, if there ██ █ ██████ ██████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ████████████ ██████ █████ ██ ███ ███████████ ████ ██ █████████████
(B) brings in brand new ideas. The entire passage is about how the unanimity requirement is essential; nothing in P3 suggests that the unanimity requirement should be up for public debate. In the end of P3, the aspect of public confidence comes from the requirement for unanimity in juries, not from the debate itself.
c
The opinion of ████ █████ ██ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ████ ██ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ █ ████ ██████████
This sentence aligns with the author’s point at the end of P3, which is that considering each juror’s opinion is
d
Unfortunately, because some █████████ ████ █████████████ ████ ██████ ██ ████████████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██████ ███ ████ ███████████
This contradicts the author’s point at the end of P3. The end of P3 is all about how the unanimity requirement can increase society’s confidence in the justice system; (D) completely changes the tone and brings in new, unrelated ideas to show that the integrity of the justice system has been undermined. This does not flow logically from the end of P3.
e
But even without ███ █████████ ████████████ ████ ██████ ███ ████ ████████ ████ █████ ████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███████████ ███ ███████ █████████ ██████ ████ ███████████
P3 is all about how the unanimity requirement is important for ensuring fair verdicts; the sentence in (E) completely goes against this idea and claims that the unanimity requirement actually isn’t necessary.