Alicia Green
This topic has expert replies
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:30 am
- Thanked: 19 times
18 C Author admits that the car was damaged in Peter's case and not in Alicia's case... but it looks like a way to acknowledge the opposite side. It cannot be B because he wants Alicia to also be convincted
19 E
Conclusion states that Alicia should also be charged for theft.
Only E shows makes a strong case to refute the conclusion. It shows that Alicia was a good driver whereas Peter was a repeat offender which led to the difference in the way the two cases were handled by the police.
19 E
Conclusion states that Alicia should also be charged for theft.
Only E shows makes a strong case to refute the conclusion. It shows that Alicia was a good driver whereas Peter was a repeat offender which led to the difference in the way the two cases were handled by the police.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1578
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
- Thanked: 82 times
- Followed by:9 members
- GMAT Score:720
Out of the ridiculous options C and A make sense to me as well.
I presume they are LSAT Q, as some other voices too is being made it seems it is useless to involve LSAT prep in GMAT, this Q and similes could be a prime example....
I presume they are LSAT Q, as some other voices too is being made it seems it is useless to involve LSAT prep in GMAT, this Q and similes could be a prime example....
Charged up again to beat the beast