The excerpt below comes from a 2020 legal proceeding transcript. Legal counsel Rebecca Foster has been constructing a financial fraud...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
The excerpt below comes from a 2020 legal proceeding transcript. Legal counsel Rebecca Foster has been constructing a financial fraud prosecution. Her supervising colleague has suggested that Foster's evidence might still be inadequate for the accusations she intends to file.
FOSTER: The documentary evidence we've gathered remains fragmented, resembling indirect indicators rather than concrete verification. Didn't we demonstrate that the accused conducted multiple questionable financial activities?
SENIOR PARTNER: You did demonstrate those activities, Rebecca, and uncovered more anomalies than we originally anticipated. However, what significance does this evidence hold? What additional accusations do you believe are substantiated by this financial behavior? The questionable activities you've recorded establish groundwork that could substantiate accusations of systematic financial misconduct.
Based on the text, what conclusion does the senior partner most explicitly draw regarding Foster's evidence and its legal ramifications?
Foster's worries regarding the fragmentary character of certain evidence are compromising her decision-making and appear to be creating hesitation toward filing the systematic misconduct accusations.
The questionable financial activities Foster has recorded establish groundwork that could substantiate accusations of systematic financial misconduct.
Foster's initial discoveries regarding financial anomalies possess an uncertain character that demonstrates her cautious methodology toward the present case.
Foster's analysis of the financial activity pattern lacks clarity because she is examining situations she had hypothesized about as legal counsel rather than situations that had genuinely taken place.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "The excerpt below comes from a 2020 legal proceeding transcript. Legal counsel Rebecca Foster has been constructing a financial fraud prosecution. Her supervising colleague has suggested that Foster's evidence might still be inadequate for the accusations she intends to file." |
|
| "FOSTER: The documentary evidence we've gathered remains fragmented, resembling indirect indicators rather than concrete verification." |
|
| "Didn't we demonstrate that the accused conducted multiple questionable financial activities?" |
|
| "SENIOR PARTNER: You did demonstrate those activities, Rebecca, and uncovered more anomalies than we originally anticipated." |
|
| "However, what significance does this evidence hold? What additional accusations do you believe are substantiated by this financial behavior?" |
|
| "The questionable activities you've recorded establish groundwork that could substantiate accusations of systematic financial misconduct." |
|
Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: The senior partner concludes that Foster's evidence of questionable financial activities establishes a foundation that could support charges of systematic financial misconduct.
Argument Flow: Foster expresses concern about fragmented evidence but seeks validation of what they've found. The senior partner confirms Foster's discoveries were substantial, then guides her to think about legal implications, ultimately concluding that the evidence provides groundwork for systematic misconduct accusations.
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
- First think about what the right answer should tell us
- Should be something the senior partner directly says, not just implies
- Should relate to both the evidence Foster has gathered AND what legal significance it has
- Should reflect the senior partner's final assessment after acknowledging Foster's work
- Looking at analysis, the senior partner makes one very clear, direct statement about the legal ramifications
- Foster's questionable activities establish groundwork that could substantiate systematic financial misconduct accusations
Foster's worries regarding the fragmentary character of certain evidence are compromising her decision-making and appear to be creating hesitation toward filing the systematic misconduct accusations.
- Focuses on Foster's worries and hesitation about filing accusations
- The senior partner doesn't conclude that Foster is hesitant
- In fact, the senior partner is helping Foster see the strength of her evidence
The questionable financial activities Foster has recorded establish groundwork that could substantiate accusations of systematic financial misconduct.
- This is almost a direct quote from the senior partner's final statement
- Matches exactly what the senior partner explicitly concludes about the legal significance
- Addresses both the evidence (questionable activities) and its legal ramifications (systematic misconduct accusations)
Foster's initial discoveries regarding financial anomalies possess an uncertain character that demonstrates her cautious methodology toward the present case.
- Focuses on uncertainty and cautious methodology
- The senior partner doesn't conclude that Foster's discoveries are uncertain
- He actually validates them and says they found more than expected
Foster's analysis of the financial activity pattern lacks clarity because she is examining situations she had hypothesized about as legal counsel rather than situations that had genuinely taken place.
- Claims Foster lacks clarity because she's examining hypothetical situations
- Nothing in the passage suggests the situations are hypothetical
- The senior partner confirms the activities were real