Comprehensionhard · Past Paper
A judge dismisses a case because the evidence was 'circumstantial and lacked a direct nexus to the defendant.' What does this mean?
AThe defendant is definitely guilty.
BThe evidence was not strong enough or directly linked to the person.
CThe judge is friends with the defendant.
DThe case needs more witnesses to testify.
✓ Correct Answer: B — The evidence was not strong enough or directly linked to the person.
Circumstantial evidence requires inference; 'lacking a nexus' means there is no clear connection.
Share this question
More from Comprehension
- Read the passage: The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis suggests that the language a person speaks influences how they perceive and think about the world. If a language lacks a word for a certain concept, its speakers might find it harder to grasp that concept. Question: What does the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis deal with?
- The hiker looked at the moss growing on the north side of the trees to find his way back. What can you infer about the hiker?
- In the story, the protagonist's shadow begins to move independently of him. This most likely suggests that:
- Passage: Deforestation in the Terai region of Nepal has led to several environmental issues, including soil erosion and loss of biodiversity. Forests are being cleared for agriculture and human settlements. Q61. What are the two main reasons for clearing forests mentioned in the passage?
- Read the passage: The tiger is the national animal of India. In Nepal, the cow is the national animal. Tigers live in jungles. Question: What is the national animal of Nepal?