BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

historian

Expert replies
by crazy4gmat » Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:41 pm
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.
The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Lina » Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:28 pm
IMO Ans is E , other choices are out of scope ...
Join the discussion

by vittalgmat » Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:05 am
leaning towards E.
However I did spend some time on C.
We know he peddled for 20 yrs and also that he was arrested for peddling "without Lic" in 1939. I dint really see "without lic' and concluded, in worst case if he was arrested on day 1 of his peddling, and continued off and on for next 20yrs, he would have done till 1959. so definetly before 1965.

So not sure of E or C..

Can some one help here!!!
Join the discussion

IMO C

by ankit1383 » Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:33 am
IMO....C
Join the discussion

by nervesofsteel » Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:50 am
it should be C

E is unsupported by question stem..
as there is no evidence of better or worst
Join the discussion

by sarika_33 » Wed Dec 03, 2008 8:58 am
My ans is E too .

Rest all are kind of out of scope
Join the discussion

peddling

by poseidon344 » Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:59 am
infrence-E
PLAY HARD AND WORK HARD
Join the discussion

by Jatinder » Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:58 pm
vittalgmat wrote:leaning towards E.
However I did spend some time on C.
We know he peddled for 20 yrs and also that he was arrested for peddling "without Lic" in 1939. I dint really see "without lic' and concluded, in worst case if he was arrested on day 1 of his peddling, and continued off and on for next 20yrs, he would have done till 1959. so definetly before 1965.

So not sure of E or C..

Can some one help here!!!
Perfect justification for C; why you are holding E then!!!
we are not told any info, from which we can deduce which is a better evdence.
Keep flying
Join the discussion

Re: historian

by logitech » Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:33 am
(C) The undated document was written before 1765> 1739+20
LGTCH
---------------------
"DON'T LET ANYONE STEAL YOUR DREAM!"
Join the discussion

by niraj_a » Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:59 am
C FOR SURE
Join the discussion

by gl750raj » Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:21 pm
E is the right inference. C is more ambiguous than E. So E it is.
Attitude is everything!
Join the discussion

by gl750raj » Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:22 pm
E is the right inference. C is more ambiguous than E. So E it is.
Attitude is everything!
Join the discussion

by callmemo » Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:37 am
Why not A?

The stimulus tells us one thing for sure, the second document should be dated later than the first one. But this doesn't necessarily conclude that the second document should be written before 1765. For instance, it could be dated much later.
Join the discussion

by shafeek » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:50 pm
I go with E .
Join the discussion

by rohangupta83 » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:59 pm
imo C

the problem with E is, it is wayyyyyyy too close for comfort.

I'll explain:

We have 2 evidences
1) - Police Record proving that Schnitzler was peddling

2) - Schnitzler's confession that he was peddling

Now, I am not a lawyer but I think both prove that Schnitzler was peddling and are likely to hold the same weight in the court of law.

I've got to go with C as he maintains that he has been peddling for 20 years. - meaning he hasn't yet given up. My focus would be on the tense here.
Join the discussion