DISCUSSION: The last paragraph said that unanimity makes trials more fair. Lack of unanimity means we couldn’t be sure whether juries were reaching correct verdicts.
The author thinks unanimity is very important. The correct answer provides a strong closing.
- Huh? By this point, the author is done discussing the argument against unanimity. And traditions of argument were never mentioned.
- The author never said anything should be debated in public. They think everything is fine as it is.
- CORRECT. This is a bit over the top, but it matches the author’s opinion. You don’t have a real democracy if some people are denied the vote. Likewise, you don’t have a real jury trial unless everyone’s opinion is considered.
- Not really. The author implies that the public still trusts juries (lines 53-54). How many citizens would have even heard about a debate over hung juries? There’s no way the legal system has been undermined by this.
- The author never mentioned the methods of lawyers. This might be true, but the author might also argue that unanimity is even more important than scientific legal methods.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions