DISCUSSION: This is asking for something the author says is true. We know the author’s position was, essentially: “charge corporations directly with crimes. It is a mistake to try to charge individual executives or use civil liability.”
So, look for an answer that praises charging companies, or that gives a problem with charging executives or with civil liability.
___________
- The theorists are the ones saying that civil liability is a better determinant of appropriate levels of damages. The author’s position is that criminal liability is better than civil.
- Paragraph 2 is where the author critiques civil sanctions. They don’t mention employees being harmed by civil sanctions.
- Deterrence (or censuring) is stated as the main aim of criminal liability, not civil liability.
Sentence 3 in paragraph 2 says that civil lawsuits are bad at deterrence. The problem with civil lawsuits is that they require an identifiable victim who is rich enough to sue. If a lawsuit is unlikely, then wrong-doers won’t be deterred. - This answer was the argument in paragraph 3, by critics. The author thinks they are wrong (see paragraph 4): individuals are not deterred, because responsibility is shared among many, and scapegoats can also take the blame.
- CORRECT. This is mentioned directly in sentence 3 of paragraph 2.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions
Leave a Reply