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

Redeem

police

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 11:16 am
Thanked: 77 times
Followed by:49 members

police

by atulmangal » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:55 pm
The lawyer for the defense charged that she suspected the police of having illegally taped her confidential conversations with her client and then used the information obtained to find evidence supporting their murder charges.
(A) used the information obtained to find evidence supporting
(B) used such information as they obtained to find evidence supporting
(C) used the information they had obtained to find evidence that would support
(D) of using the information they had obtained to find evidence that would support
(E) of using such information as they obtained to find evidence that would be supportive of
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:33 pm
Location: Pune, India
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:1 members

by tetura84 » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:04 am
Police did two things.
1. illegally taped ....
2. used such information .... = they should be in parallel

Among A B C
supporting vs that would support
supporting distorts the meaning = modifies the entire clause.

evidence that would support = correctly modifies their murder charges.

IMO C
78 clicks can change my life !
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:12 am
Between A and C

"their murder charges" shall have a "they"

IMO C
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 11:16 am
Thanked: 77 times
Followed by:49 members

by atulmangal » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:45 am
OA is D, dont know how
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:36 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:15 members

by AIM GMAT » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:03 am
The lawyer for the defense charged that she suspected the police of having illegally taped her confidential conversations with her client and then used the information obtained to find evidence supporting their murder charges.

(A) used the information obtained to find evidence supporting

(B) used such information as they obtained to find evidence supporting

(C) used the information they had obtained to find evidence that would support

(D) of using the information they had obtained to find evidence that would support

(E) of using such information as they obtained to find evidence that would be supportive of

Option A , B and C are not following the parallel structure .

D and E :- follow parallel structure == of having || of using

IMO D
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:32 am
Yes ... I missed the parallel
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1083
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:38 pm
Thanked: 127 times
Followed by:14 members

by gmat_perfect » Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:02 am
atulmangal wrote:The lawyer for the defense charged that she suspected the police of having illegally taped her confidential conversations with her client and then used the information obtained to find evidence supporting their murder charges.
(A) used the information obtained to find evidence supporting
(B) used such information as they obtained to find evidence supporting
(C) used the information they had obtained to find evidence that would support
(D) of using the information they had obtained to find evidence that would support
(E) of using such information as they obtained to find evidence that would be supportive of
Suspect:
believe or feel that (someone) is guilty of an illegal, dishonest, or unpleasant act, without certain proof:

Parents suspected of child abuse.

The parallelism is as follows:

she suspected the police of having X..............and of using Y
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:33 pm
Location: Pune, India
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:1 members

by tetura84 » Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:55 am
tetura84 wrote:Police did two things.
1. illegally taped ....
2. used such information .... = they should be in parallel

Among A B C
supporting vs that would support
supporting distorts the meaning = modifies the entire clause.

evidence that would support = correctly modifies their murder charges.

IMO C
I took the wrong parallelism :(
Even if police did 2 things, both of them the lawyer suspected.
So basically, Lawyer suspected 2 things,
1. of having illegally taped ...
2. of using the information ...

Need to be more cautious.
78 clicks can change my life !
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:02 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

by champmag » Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:15 pm
She suspected the police of X and of Y...the 'of' used before the two things that she suspects the police makes the parallelism complete.

Thus Ans: D
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1