#16 - Local, Could Be True, Except

[Dave Killoran]

Complete Question Explanation
(The complete setup for this game can be found here: lsat/viewtopic.php?f=176&p=88283#p88283)

The correct answer choice is (A).

The question stem specifies that both X and Y confess. Thus, neither X nor Y can be questioned on day four because the suspect questioned on day four does not confess. Of course, during the setup discussion we determined that Z cannot be questioned on day four, so the only suspect that can be questioned on day four is V, and accordingly V does not confess. Thus, answer choice (A) cannot occur and is correct.

With the other answer choices, consider that from the fourth rule X cannot be questioned first, and the suspect questioned on day four does not confess, leaving only days two and five as available days where X could be questioned and confess. Thus, answer choice (B) could be true and is incorrect.

Y could be questioned on either day one, day two, or day five, and so answer choice (C) could be true and is incorrect.

Z could be questioned on day one or two, and the suspect questioned on each of those days can either confess or not confess, and so answer choices (D) and (E) are both possible, and thus incorrect.

[deck1134]

Clearly I don't understand this game at all. I am so sorry!

I similarly do not understand this question.

My setup was:

_ _ _ N C C N
_ _ T _ X Y _

Why does this mean that V could not confess? Couldn't V go into place 2, which is a confession?

I'm sorry to have butchered this so massively!

[Adam Tyson]

Your diagram of the "confessed/not confessed" inferences is perfect, Deck, so you're off to a great start! What's missing are the inferences about the order of suspects being questioned. For example, nobody confesses after W is questioned, but the 5th and 6th suspects questioned DO confess, and also S has to be after W. Those rules and inferences combined mean a few things: S cannot confess, and W must be the 6th suspect questioned (because if he was any earlier then at least one suspect - the one questioned 6th - would confess after W was questioned, a no-no, and if he was questioned 7th then S couldn't be questioned after him). Your order of suspects, then, should also include that W is 6th and S is 7th:

_ _ _N C C N
_ _T _ _ W S

From there you can see that your local diagram won't work, because even though X and Y confess, neither of them can go 6th because W is there. Just because they must confess and those two spaces are for people who do confess doesn't mean that they have to go there, because there are other spaces available for confessing suspects. Where, then, do they go? Hard to say - maybe one goes 5th, but 1st and 2nd are also options for suspects who confess. X can't go first, though, because it has to be after Z somewhere. Maybe a better question, then, is where can those two NOT go? One obvious answer is 4th, because the suspect questioned 4th does NOT confess. Who, then, could go 4th? Not T, W, or S, because they are elsewhere already. Not X or Y, as we've said, because they have to confess in this local question. Not Z, because Z must be before both X and V, and there wouldn't be room for both of those if Z was 4th. In fact, Z can never go 4th for that very reason (that not-law could be in your main diagram).

Who does that leave to go 4th? We've eliminated 6 of the 7 variables, leaving only V, so V has to be 4th and cannot confess! That's why answer A cannot be true and is the correct answer to this Could-Be-True-EXCEPT question.

Flesh that diagram out a little more, and beware of unwarranted inferences (like X and Y have to go 5th and 6th because they confess) and you will be in much better shape. Good luck, keep at it!