Q4

[LSAT-Chang]

Hello! I picked (A) for this, but now that I look at it again, the word "suspend" seems a little too strong for the author's opinion since although the author comments in lines 38-40 "and aside from the risk of intentional manipulation of images or deceitful use of capacities such as stop-action and highlighting" it never says that they should SUSPEND it. So I understand why (A) is wrong.

But I don't get where (B) came from. I see the first part to be true "computer-generated evidence should be scrutinized..." and the author would agree with it since the author outlines some of the could-be negative aspects of computer-generated displays in the second paragraph, but the second part of answer choice (B) which says "ensure that it does not rely on excessive speculation in depicting the details of an event" just seems to be something totally new to me. What is wrong with excessive speculation?

[timmydoeslsat]

I just did this passage to help you but it appears you basically had it all along

A is wrong because the author is saying that steps should be taken. There could a case in the interim where a defense team was going to use a stop action and highlighting technique to show innocence.

The author would not want that to happen. The author wants this potential imbalance to be eventually eradicated, but not necessarily at the moment.

B) Lines 47-51 point towards the author agreeing with this. Somebody needs to make sure that the data underlying these displays are accurate.

[LSAT-Chang]

Haha your efforts are amazing. Thanks so much timmy!! I just really think my main problem is that I'm looking "word for word" in these answer choices...

[schmid215]

I would actually say that (A) is wrong because if both sides have sufficient funding for CGD, then the author would be fine with them using it. Hence, not all stop-action and highlighting should be banned.

[rinagoldfield]

Ok. This inference question asks the reader to identify something the author would agree with regarding computer displays in the courtroom. The author outlines her take on computer displays in the third paragraph, so this is where we should look for evidence of her position. The opening line of the third paragraph brilliantly boils down the author’s main point: "To avoid misuse of this technology in the courtroom, practical steps must be taken."

(A) is tempting. The author does indeed support the creation of an "adequate financial program" to ensure that both parties in a case can provide the same kinds of evidence (lines 59-61). However, (A) is too strong. The author never proposes suspending the use of technology until a financial aid program is created.

(B) seems maybe a little narrow in scope... but the author might support it. Hold onto this answer choice.

(C) and (D) are out of scope. The author doesn’t compare computer displays to still photography or to verbal accounts by eyewitness. Eliminate both.

(E) is unsupported. Computer displays in the courtroom don’t the lack ability to persuade jurors; if anything, they "mesmerize jurors and cause them to relax their normal critical faculties."

That leaves us with (B). The author outlines the risk of speculation at the end of the second paragraph, suggesting that some displays might be too misleading to constitute suitable evidence. She later argues that "diligent analyses of the data that form the basis for computer displays should be routinely performed" (lines 49-51). Taken together, these lines offer strong support for (B)’s proposal to scrutinize evidence to avoid excessive speculation.