LSAT 142 | Section 3 | Reading Comprehension: Q15

RC Question 15 Explanation

DISCUSSION: Lines 6-10 offer a summary of the benefits of stealing thunder. The author says, in line 14, that stealing thunder is effective.

The author couldn’t be referring to a definition of stealing thunder that they hadn’t yet stated, so the claim on line 14 can only be interpreted in reference to the earlier definition of stealing thunder in lines 6-10. That definition is the basis of answer A.

___________

1. CORRECT. This is the best answer. Stealing thunder offers no guarantee of victory, but it does generally improve how jurors view negative information. Lines 6-10 summarize this rationale.
2. This is a misstatement of lines 26-30. Those lines  said that, once lawyers introduce information, jurors will use that information to form counterarguments. So the jurors make up counterarguments – lawyers don’t supply the counterarguments.
3. This is far too strong. Lines 10-11 say we don’t even have courtroom evidence of the effectiveness of stealing thunder. And even if it works, stealing thunder certainly doesn’t guarantee victory. It merely reduces the impact of negative information, but the information is still negative.
4. Hogwash. The passage doesn’t mention “forcefully capturing” attention or getting juries to focus more attentively. This answer has nothing to do with what’s said in the passage.
5. Lines 10-11 say we have no studies of the effectiveness of stealing thunder in actual courtrooms. So we definitely don’t know if this answer choice is true.