LSAT 66, Logical Reasoning I, Q3, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Lawyer: Juries are traditionally given their instructions…

QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen – Exception

CONCLUSION: Jury instructions should be simple and easy to understand.

REASONING: It’s more important for juries to understand their role, than it is for their role to be precisely specified.

ANALYSIS: Many of the wrong answers seem too obvious. That’s ok. They still strengthen the argument by making some assumptions explicit.

___________

1. This shows that the current way of writing jury instructions makes them harder to understand. This seems like something we could have assumed, but making it explicit strengthens the argument.
2. This shows that current instructions don’t work.
3. This shows that it’s possible for jury instructions to work when they’re simplified. That’s helpful.
4. CORRECT. This shows a downside to simplified language. It definitely doesn’t strengthen the argument.
5. This shows that the argument’s reasoning isn’t wrong. Precision is not necessary for a basic understanding of a jury’s role.

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---