MBA考试

【单选题】The question of ethics in the legal profession is one that has plagued the industry since its inception. The common image of an attorney is one who will resort to any unethical trick to twist the laws to fit his purposes. In the more specific industry of criminal law, defense attorneys are often criticized for advocating on behalf of defendants who are "obviously guilty," thus becoming roadblocks on the path to justice. Much to the contrary, however, defense attorneys provide a valuable serve that should earn them praise, not scorn.
While it is true that every lawyer will do everything within his power to interpret the laws in the manner most beneficial to his client, such a characterization is by no means limited to defense attorneys. The prosecutor will do the same thing, employing all his legal knowledge and know-how to establish the guilt of the defendant. In this respect, the vague nature of the law is highlighted, and it becomes a virtual necessity for each side to use every tool at their disposal, on the assumption that the other side will also use every tool at his. The net result emerges as a positive, in which the tricks of the opposing attorneys cancel one another out, leaving only the truth, clearer and devoid of manipulation, presented for the jury’s consideration.
Further, the defense attorney is a vital element of theAmerican judicial system, in that without him the defendant would stand no chance whatsoever. Under the constitution, even the most "obvious guilty" defendants are guaranteed the right to a fair trial, involving someone able and willing to advocate on his behalf. Of course, there are bad apples in the industry who are unethical and care nothing for actual justice, and whose only concerns are their wallets. Generally speaking, however, without defense attorneys, the system would crumble into a mere machine in which defendants are assumed guilty, without a chance to argue or prove otherwise, and many innocent people falsely charged with crimes would be severely punished for transgressions that they didn’t commit.It is a basic fact that the adversarial system of justice in the United States is necessary in order to ensure the fairest and most unbiased presentation and evaluation of the facts possible. Without defense attorneys, that system cannot be carried out, and would result in a loss of the civil liberties that the nation enjoys and treasures. To that end, all of those who make that process a reality, including defense attorneys, deserve our support and admiration, not our suspicion and disdain.
According to the author, which of the following is NOT necessarily the case
A、What is presented to the jury is unobstructed truth.
B、Without defense attorneys, innocent people would go to jail.
C、Attorneys will use all methods at their disposal to make the facts and laws favor their clients.
D、The adversarial process yields fair and unbiased presentation and evaluation of facts.
网考网参考答案：D
网考网解析：
这是一道细节题。文章第二段指出：尽自己所能以对自己的当事人有利的方式来诠释法律不仅是辩护律师的准则，也是公诉人的一贯做法；这样做的结果就是呈现给陪审团一个最清楚的事实真相，而不带任何人为操纵的痕迹。这说明，A和、 C与第二段的意思符合。第三段最后一句话证实B与文章的意思符合。只有D“美国司法体系的对抗性程序导致了对事实的公平、没有偏见的表述和评价”，将原文最后一段第一句话的意思绝对化了， 曲解了原文的意思，所以不对。 document.getElementById("warp").style.display="none"; document.getElementById("content").style.display="block"; 查看试题解析出处>>