prismlearning.academy Logo
NEUR
N

Considering the presence of contradictory witness statements, insufficient records, and conflicting forensic findings, numerous intricate legal procee...

GMAT Craft and Structure : (Structure) Questions

Source: Prism
Craft and Structure
Words in Context
EASY
...
...
Notes
Post a Query

Considering the presence of contradictory witness statements, insufficient records, and conflicting forensic findings, numerous intricate legal proceedings can be exceptionally difficult to _______ and often lead to extended appellate reviews.

Which choice completes the text with the most logical and precise word or phrase?

A

adjudicate

B

prosecute

C

mandate

D

litigate

Solution

Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage

Part A: Create Passage Analysis Table

Text from PassageAnalysis
'Considering the presence of contradictory witness statements, insufficient records, and conflicting forensic findings,'
  • What it says: Legal cases have problems: witnesses disagree, records missing, forensics conflict
  • What it does: Presents the challenging circumstances that affect legal proceedings
  • What it is: Context/background conditions
'numerous intricate legal proceedings can be exceptionally difficult to _______'
  • What it says: Complex legal cases = very hard to [missing action]
  • What it does: States the main claim about the impact of these problems
  • What it is: Main claim
[MISSING WORD]
  • What it is: Missing logical connector
'and often lead to extended appellate reviews.'
  • What it says: → long appeals process
  • What it does: Explains the consequence of the difficulty
  • What it is: Result/consequence

Part B: Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements

Visual Structure Map:
[PROBLEMATIC CONDITIONS] → [MAIN CLAIM: Legal proceedings difficult to ___] → [CONSEQUENCE: Extended appeals]

Main Point: When legal cases have contradictory evidence and insufficient records, they become very difficult to handle properly and result in lengthy appeals.

Argument Flow: The passage presents challenging conditions that affect legal cases, explains how these conditions make legal proceedings exceptionally difficult to perform some action, and concludes with the typical consequence of extended appellate reviews.

Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely

This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.

Step 3: Prethink the Answer

  • The word must describe what judges or courts do with legal proceedings that becomes difficult when there's contradictory evidence
  • It should logically connect to the result of 'extended appellate reviews'
  • The action should be something that becomes challenging when witness statements contradict, records are insufficient, and forensic findings conflict
  • Based on our analysis, the missing word should describe the formal decision-making process that courts perform
  • When evidence is contradictory and records are insufficient, it becomes very difficult to make proper legal judgments, which naturally leads to appeals where higher courts review those decisions
Answer Choices Explained
A

adjudicate

adjudicate
✓ Correct

  • Means to make a formal legal judgment or decision about a dispute
  • Perfectly fits the context - when evidence is contradictory and records insufficient, it becomes exceptionally difficult for courts to make proper judgments
  • Logically connects to extended appellate reviews, as unclear initial judgments often get appealed
B

prosecute

prosecute
✗ Incorrect

  • Means to bring criminal charges against someone or pursue legal action
  • Doesn't fit logically - the passage talks about 'intricate legal proceedings' generally, not specifically criminal prosecution
  • What trap this represents: Students might choose this because it's a legal term, but it's too narrow and doesn't connect well to appellate reviews
C

mandate

mandate
✗ Incorrect

  • Means to give an official order or require something
  • Doesn't make logical sense in this context - legal proceedings don't 'mandate' things; they decide or rule on matters
  • No logical connection to how contradictory evidence would make mandating difficult
D

litigate

litigate
✗ Incorrect

  • Means to engage in legal proceedings or bring a case to court
  • While related to legal processes, doesn't fit the logic - contradictory evidence doesn't make it difficult to 'engage in' proceedings, but rather to resolve them
  • What trap this represents: Students might choose this as another legal term, but litigation is the process itself, not the decision-making that becomes difficult with poor evidence
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
...
...
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Previous Attempts
Loading attempts...
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Parallel Question Generator
Create AI-generated questions with similar patterns to master this question type.