- Wed Jun 29, 2016 9:33 am
#26744
Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: viewtopic.php?f=1157&t=11219)
Author's perspective, weaken. The correct answer is answer choice (E).
Passage B suggests that juries are justified in nullifying when they view a case as too trivial to result in a conviction. We know that Passage A doesn't believe juries should have this level of power, so at the very least we need an answer choice that disagrees with this idea, but we also want to find an answer that is directly supported by passage A so that we're not putting words in the author's mouth.
Answer (A) - this disagrees, but passage A doesn't say anything about prosecutorial discretion, so this is not the most likely criticism.
Answer (B) - similar to answer choice (A), we don't know how the author of passage A feels about prosecutors.
Answer (C) - this is irrelevant, because if the jury is not in accord, there will be no jury nullification
Answer (D) - this is a strong contender - it is similar to the 3 reasons passage A cited as why jury nullification is problematic, but even if all jurors had the expertise to evaluate a case the author in passage A would still take issue with nullification for unrelated reasons, such as lack of information or transparency.
Answer (E) - this is the correct answer because it touches on one of the issues passage A presents with jury nullification - the jury often doesn't have access to all the information needed in order to make this decision.
(See the complete passage discussion here: viewtopic.php?f=1157&t=11219)
Author's perspective, weaken. The correct answer is answer choice (E).
Passage B suggests that juries are justified in nullifying when they view a case as too trivial to result in a conviction. We know that Passage A doesn't believe juries should have this level of power, so at the very least we need an answer choice that disagrees with this idea, but we also want to find an answer that is directly supported by passage A so that we're not putting words in the author's mouth.
Answer (A) - this disagrees, but passage A doesn't say anything about prosecutorial discretion, so this is not the most likely criticism.
Answer (B) - similar to answer choice (A), we don't know how the author of passage A feels about prosecutors.
Answer (C) - this is irrelevant, because if the jury is not in accord, there will be no jury nullification
Answer (D) - this is a strong contender - it is similar to the 3 reasons passage A cited as why jury nullification is problematic, but even if all jurors had the expertise to evaluate a case the author in passage A would still take issue with nullification for unrelated reasons, such as lack of information or transparency.
Answer (E) - this is the correct answer because it touches on one of the issues passage A presents with jury nullification - the jury often doesn't have access to all the information needed in order to make this decision.