PDA

View Full Version : CR: Exclusionary rule


Hqta
05-11-2006, 09:37 PM
Các bác thử câu này nhé!

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights, has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts. Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty, and even when it has been clear that the police officers were acting in good faith, the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even by introduced. In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again.

The author of the passage above assumes all of the following EXCEPT:

(A) The constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected.

(B) Most cases in which the exclusionary rule has been invoked have involved purely technical violations of constitutional principles.

(C) The number of cases whose outcome has been affected by the exclusionary rule is significant.

(D) Some of the defendants set free under the exclusionary rule have been guilty of serious criminal offenses.

(E) Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights.

lehang267
27-11-2006, 11:48 PM
Em chọn E. Hic, câu này đọc khó hiểu quá anh Hải ơi.

toiday
28-11-2006, 01:02 PM
It should be B

Hbson
28-11-2006, 04:32 PM
1 vote for E

Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights, has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts. Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty, and even when it has been clear that the police officers were acting in good faith, the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even by introduced. In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again.

Argument: Exclusionary rule(forbids, minor violation,...)---> evidence (tainted& not introduced)--->defendants( guilty) set free to...steal, merder...

Assumption: not set free----> rule(not forbids, not minor...)

(A) The constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected. assumed from "not forbid"

(B) Most cases in which the exclusionary rule has been invoked have involved purely technical violations of constitutional principles. assumed from the logic diagram
(C) The number of cases whose outcome has been affected by the exclusionary rule is significant. assumed from "even when....minor violation"

(D) Some of the defendants set free under the exclusionary rule have been guilty of serious criminal offenses. assumed từ chính kết luận :defendants...set free to steal....

(E) Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights.

Merely= only technical violation mới cần phải be treated differently, Thực ra, tác giả muốn assume tất cả những cái trên.

Hốp it help guys

lehang267
28-11-2006, 06:08 PM
câu này tớ chỉ consider B và E nhưng cuối cùng vẫn chọn E. Anh Hải trả lời đi...

toiday
29-11-2006, 01:12 PM
still go for B

thuong1
29-11-2006, 09:18 PM
One more vote for B. Mấy câu kiểu này đọc căng hết cả đầu.
A.Quang ơi, anh vào soi sáng lý thuyết vận dụng crack giúp câu này với ạ.

thuonghuyen
29-11-2006, 09:26 PM
Another vote for B
hichic câu này dài quá ...thấy các bác chiến đấu một cách thản nhiên nên em hít một hơi thất sâu để ....lấy tinh thần :D