[Bandzi]

Nismo se razumeli...

Prvobitno poslao korisnik Bandzi

treba dosta vremena da razumem šta se traži u zadatku.

Kao što rekoh ne znam toliko engleski ,jer ga nisam koristio u svakodnevnom životu.

Prvobitno poslao korisnik Žana

Questions 1-2 are based on the following (critical reasoning).
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights, has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts. Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty, and even when it has been clear that the police officers were acting in good faith, the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even by introduced. In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again.

1. The author of the passage above assumes all of the following EXCEPT:
(A) The constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected.
(B) Most cases in which the exclusionary rule has been invoked have involved purely technical violations of constitutional principles.
(C) The number of cases whose outcome has been affected by the exclusionary rule is significant.
(D) Some of the defendants set free under the exclusionary rule have been guilty of serious criminal offenses.
(E) Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights.

2. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would most likely endorse which of the following proposals?
(A) Change of the exclusionary rule to admit evidence obtained by police officers acting in good faith
(B) A constitutional amendment curtailing some of the protections traditionally afforded those accused of a crime
(C) A statute limiting the application of the exclusionary rule to cases involving minor criminal offenses
(D) Change of the exclusionary rule to allow any evidence, no matter how obtained, to be introduced in court
(E) A constitutional amendment allowing police officers to obtain vital evidence by any means necessary when in pursuit of a known criminal

Sentence Correction

The Navy used the nuclear submarine accident off the coast of Hawaii to show that everyone must be held responsible for their actions.

1. to show that everyone must be held responsible for their actions.
2. to demonstrate their belief that everyone must be held responsible for their actions.
3. to demonstrate its belief that everyone must be held responsible for their actions.
4. to signal how no one should be able to get away with committing acts of terrible negligence.
5. to show that everyone must be held responsible for his actions.

I never fail to get frustrated on the golf course: nonetheless, I always resolve to continue my involving in the game.

1. on the golf course: nonetheless, I always resolve to continue my involving in the game.
2. on the golf course: yet nonetheless I always resolve to continue my involvement in the game.
3. on the golf course; nonetheless, I always resolve to continue my involvement in the game.
4. on the golf course; yet nonetheless I always resolve to continue being involved in the game.
5. on the golf course but I always still manage to find a way to resolve my self to continue my pursuit of the involvement of the game.

Naravno, sastavni deo testa je i Analytical Writing Assessment.

Za ovakve zadatke je potreban malo bolji engleski.
Hteo sam da kažem da deo koji se svodi na rešavanje zadataka iz matemematike nije težak (to ne znači da je lak). A za Analytical Writing Assessment je potrebno usavršavanje engleskog.

Pretpostavljam da sam Vam dosadio sa pitanjima.

Hvala Vam za pomoć.