PT150.S4.P4.Q24 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Passage A.

Trial court judges oppose independent research · They say it distorts the adversarial system and that judges aren't that good at research

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

Author's criticism · The judges' concerns don't justify an absolute ban on independent research by judges

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

Support 1 · Adversarial system doesn't handle specialized knowledge (like science) well

Independence research for specialized knowledge can help.

Support 2 · Trial structure reduces possibility of reaching bad research results

Independent research only supplements the parties' evidence.

███████ █

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

Author's perspective · Appellate courts should not do independent research

Trial court judges can do whatever they want. But appellate courts shouldn't do research.

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

Support · Appellate courts don't have important tools for figuring out what's true

Live testimony from experts can help judges understand scientific stuff, and cross-examination of those experts can help discover what's true. Appellate judges don't get these things, since they happen only at the trial level.

Support · Trial courts determine the facts; appellate courts shouldn't intrude on this

Support · Appellate courts who do research risk reaching bad results; they also shouldn't read stuff that wasn't presented to the trial court

Passage Style

24.

Given the statements about cross-examination ██ ███ ██████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ █████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ █ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ ████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ██

Question Type

Author’s perspective

Implied

This question is about how passage B relates to passage A, so we’ll need to read both passages before answering. Author B says that a strength of the adversarial structure of trials is that scientific evidence can be challenged through cross-examination. Author A also talks about this adversarial structure, but says it’s poorly equipped to handle scientific evidence. Author B would take issue with this criticism.

An absolute prohibition ██ ███████████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████████

The referenced claim in passage B says that the adversarial structure of cross-examination is a good way to deal with scientific evidence. Nothing about that contradicts author A’s claim that it’s okay for judges to sometimes do independent research. Author B would say sure, expert witnesses can be cross-examined and then trial judges can do independent research too, if they want.

The adversarial system ██ ████████████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███████████ ██████████

Author B would take issue with this claim. He has a positive view of the adversarial system’s ability to deal with scientific evidence by subjecting expert witnesses to cross-examination.

69%

Scientific admissibility decisions █████ ████████████ █████████ ████ ██████ ██████

This says that when a judge decides to allow or block certain scientific evidence, it has a downstream effect on what kinds of evidence are allowed in future trials. The referenced claim in passage B says that the adversarial structure of cross-examination is a good way to deal with scientific evidence. There’s nothing contradictory in these two ideas. Author B would say sure, judges can make decisions about what evidence to allow. And then expert witnesses can be cross-examined over the evidence that’s allowed.

Erroneous decisions can ██ ███████ ███████ ██ █████ ████████

This isn’t a claim made by author A.

A trial provides █ █████████ ████ ██████ ███ █████████ ███████████ █████████

The referenced claim in passage B says that the adversarial structure of cross-examination is a good way to deal with scientific evidence. Nothing about that contradicts author A’s claim that trials put guardrails on independent research. Author B would say sure, expert witnesses can be cross-examined through the course of a trial, and if trial judges want, they do some independent research within the bounds of the trial structure.

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic

More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

PrepTest 150 - Section 4 - Passage 4 - Question 24

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action

PrepTest 150 - Section 4 - Passage 4 - Question 24

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Want to know why the right answer is right?