FREE LEAB Reasoning and Information Ordering Questions and Answers

0%

Scenario: The local law enforcement agency has developed a detailed categorization system for incidents of vandalism within its jurisdiction to streamline response and investigative procedures.

The categories are as follows:
Category A: Vandalism involving graffiti or tagging on public property or infrastructure.
Category B: Vandalism causing damage to religious or cultural monuments, regardless of the financial cost of the damage.
Category C: Vandalism to private property where the cost of damage is estimated to be less than $500.
Category D: Vandalism to private property with damages exceeding $500 but less than $5,000.

When officers respond to a report of vandalism, they must evaluate the scene based on the above categories. Detailed reports should include photographic evidence, estimates of the damage, statements from witnesses, and any indications of the motive or bias that may influence the classification of the incident.

A report is filed with the local police department regarding vandalism. The incident involves the spray-painting of graffiti on the side of a cultural monument. No other damage is reported. How should the officers classify this incident?

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
Category B involves vandalism causing damage to religious or cultural monuments, regardless of the financial cost of the damage. Since the incident involves graffiti on a cultural monument, it fits the criteria for Category B classification.

Scenario: During a search operation in a building, police officers need to systematically search each floor for evidence or suspects. The following steps are used to ensure a thorough search. (These steps are NOT listed in the correct order.)

1. Check under furniture and in closets for any evidence or hidden individuals.
2. Mark the entrance of the floor with tape once it's cleared.
3. Announce presence loudly before entering each room.
4. Begin from the furthest point on the floor and move towards the entrance.

The above steps should be performed in the following order:

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
1. Announce presence loudly before entering each room (Step 3) to alert any potential occupants and ensure officer safety.
2. Begin from the furthest point on the floor and move towards the entrance (Step 4) to systematically cover the entire area without missing any sections.
3. Check under furniture and in closets for any evidence or hidden individuals (Step 1) to thoroughly search each area for relevant items or persons.
4. Mark the entrance of the floor with tape once it's cleared (Step 2) to indicate that the area has been searched, preventing unnecessary rechecks and ensuring efficient search coordination.

Officer Nadia arrived at the scene of a fire, and received the following account of events from a witness:

A woman who lives on the corner began burning leaves in her backyard at 5:15 PM. She went inside at 5:30, leaving the fire unattended. At around 5:45 the fire spread to a wood stack in her neighbor’s yard. Noticing the fire, the neighbor came out and poured water on the fire to try to extinguish it. This, however, only caused the fire to get larger and spread to his home. Noticing the damage she had caused, the woman quickly moved her bag of leaves into her neighbor’s yard.

The woman most likely moved the bag of leaves into her neighbor's yard to:

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
Given the fact that the fire had started from burning leaves, the woman likely moved the bag from her yard into her neighbor’s yard in an attempt to make it appear as if the neighbor was responsible for the fire.

Officer Allen was involved in a physical altercation with an elderly citizen this afternoon. Officer Allen’s account of the incident consists of the six statements below, which are out of order:

1. He got up from the sofa and started to throw things at me until I told him I was from the emergency services and he stopped.
2. After I calmed him down I apologized and promised him he will be compensated for the damage.
3. After he explained why he called, I started to break into the apartment using a crowbar. Inside, the old man was sitting on a sofa.
4. He told me about his 92-year-old neighbor who lives alone and has not been responding to calls for a few days.
5. I arrived at a residential building to respond to an emergency call made by one of the residents.
6. I met him in the hallway on the 5th floor.

What is the logical order of the above statements?

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
Every step contains a few words that give the sentence its meaning and main idea.
When you try to answer this kind of question, try to locate keywords that provide contextual information about the main idea of each numbered sentence. This will help you determine how the various steps are related to one another.

Officer Wilkins is preparing a report on a hit-and-run accident. The report will include the following sentences. (These sentences are NOT listed in the correct order.)

1. The Dodge struck the right rear fender of Mrs. Smith's Ford, and continued on its way.
2. Mrs. Smith stated that she was making a left turn from 40th Street onto Third Avenue.
3. As the car passed, Mrs. Smith noticed the rear license plate #412AEJ.
4. Mrs. Smith complained to police of back pains and was transported by ambulance to Bellevue Hospital.
5. A green Dodge traveling on Third Avenue went through the red light at 40th Street and Third Avenue.

The most logical order for the above sentences to appear in the report is:

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
To identify the correct order, the sentences for the report need to be placed into the proper time sequence. Sentences 1, 2, 3, and 5 describe the events of the accident. The proper sequence for these four events is 2, 5, 1, 3. (Mrs. Smith is attempting a left turn, when a Dodge ran the red light, struck her vehicle, and continued on its way, and as it passed she noticed its license plate number.) Answer B is the only alternative with this sequence.

RULE
Raccoons
A person may take raccoons only in accordance with the following regulations:
*Hunters must be on foot.
*Artificial lights may be used to locate, attempt to locate, or shoot a raccoon only if the raccoon has been treed or put at bay by dogs.
*Handguns used must be .17 or .22 caliber rimfire (including .22 magnum).

Note: a person may pursue and tree raccoons with dogs during the closed season and without a license.

Tom and his daughter ran after a raccoon until it climbed a tree. While shining a flashlight on it. Tom used a .17 caliber centerfire handgun to take it.

How did Tom and his daughter violate the RULE?

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
According to the RULE, “Handguns used must be .17 or .22 caliber rimfire (including .22 magnum).” – Tom used a centerfire handgun to take the raccoon, and therefore violated the RULE.

Officer Turner is writing a report on a homicide investigation. The report will include the following five sentences. (These sentences are NOT listed in the correct order.)

1. I noticed a display case for handguns was open, but there were no guns in it.
2. We got a call reporting that the front door of a pawnshop was open, but the owner was not there.
3. We interviewed tenants of the apartments in the upstairs sections of the same building.
4. Upon arrival, we discovered the body of the shop owner, apparently dead from knife wounds to the chest.
5. I called an ambulance to pick up the victim.

The most logical order for the above sentences to appear in the report is:

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
To identify the correct order, the sentences to be included in the report need to be ordered into the proper time sequence. The clearest clues involve sentences 4 and 2.
Sentence 4 begins "Upon arrival..." Therefore, sentence 4 must separate the actions that occurred prior to arriving at the scene from those events occurring after arriving at the scene. Sentence 2 is the only statement regarding actions prior to arriving (i.e., getting the call). Thus, sentence 2 must occur first and be followed by sentence 4. Only answer B begins with the sequence 2, 4. In addition, the rest of the sequence (5, 1, 3) is also appropriate.

The misdemeanor crime of battery is committed when a person applies unauthorized or unlawful force upon someone else, resulting in contact that is either harmful or offensive to the victim.

The felony of aggravated battery is committed when one commits a crime of battery with the use of a deadly weapon, commits battery resulting in serious bodily harm, or commits battery against a child, woman, or police officer.

According to the definition given, which of the following is the best example of a misdemeanor battery?

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
A woman who shoves a man downstairs causing him minor bruising is applying unlawful force that results in harmful contact to the man.

Scenario: Detective Sanchez interviewed multiple witnesses regarding a hit-and-run incident involving a red sports car. Each witness provided a description of the driver and the car:

Witness 1 - The driver was a Caucasian male in his late 40s with short, gray hair. He was wearing glasses and a blue suit.
Witness 2 - The driver appeared to be an elderly Caucasian man with white hair, possibly in his 60s. He had a beard and was wearing a green jacket.
Witness 3 - I saw a man driving the car. He looked like he was in his early 50s, had brown hair, and wore a black suit.
Witness 4 - The driver was a middle-aged man, probably in his 50s, with brown hair and a clean-shaven face. He wore a gray suit.

Given the above information, Detective Sanchez should recognize that there is a problem with the description given by the witness:

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
Witness 2's description of the driver as an elderly Caucasian man with white hair, possibly in his 60s, contradicts the descriptions provided by the other witnesses, who described the driver as being in his late 40s to early 50s with gray or brown hair. Additionally, Witness 2's description of the driver having a beard conflicts with the other witnesses' descriptions of a clean-shaven individual. Therefore, Witness 2's description raises inconsistencies that need further investigation.

Officer Dunn interviewed four witnesses to a stabbing that took place in a crowded bar and grill. Each of the witnesses saw the suspect as he was fleeing the bar. They described the suspect as follows:

Witness 1 - "He was a White male, about 25 to 30 years of age, with brown, shoulder-length hair. He was about 6'0" and weighed about 185 pounds. He wore black jeans and a brown leather jacket. He had a small scar on his forehead."
Witness 2 - "He was a male, White or Hispanic, late twenties, around 5'10", about 190 pounds, with long, brown hair. He was stocky and wore dark pants and a brownish jacket."
Witness 3 - "He was a light-skinned male, possibly White or Hispanic, in his mid-twenties, about 6' weighing about 180 pounds. He had a tattoo of a panther on his right forearm. He had moderately long hair and wore a brown shirt and dark pants."
Witness 4 - "He was a White male, around 25 years old, about 5'11" and weighing about 185 pounds. His hair was brown and over his ears, fairly long. He wore darkish clothes, I'm not sure of the color of his jacket or pants."

Given the above information, Officer Dunn should recognize that there is a problem with the description given by the witness:

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
There is agreement that the suspect was a White or Hispanic male in his mid-to-late twenties with long, brown hair who was approximately 6' tall and 185 pounds. In addition, his pants and jacket were dark in color. There were only two discrepancies across the descriptions. Witness 1 reported that the suspect had a small scar on his forehead. Witness 3 reported a tattoo of a panther on the suspect’s right forearm. Of the two, it is much harder to explain how a tattoo of a panther could be overlooked by three of four witnesses AND how one witness could see it when the other three witnesses all stated that the suspect had a jacket on during the incident.

Scenario: In December, Officer Gomez responded to a string of burglaries in the Oakwood neighborhood. The victims described the perpetrator with some variations but there were common threads. The descriptions are as follows:

Burglary 1 (December 5) - Male, possibly Hispanic, mid-20s, roughly 5'9", approximately 160 pounds, short brown hair, seen wearing a red hoodie and jeans, sneakers.
Burglary 2 (December 12) - Male, unidentified race, early 20s, around 6', about 170 pounds, curly black hair, reported to be wearing a dark jacket and cargo pants, and boots.
Burglary 3 (December 18) - Male, possibly Hispanic or White, late 20s, about 5'10", nearly 165 pounds, dark short hair, observed in a grey sweatshirt and jeans, sneakers.
On December 22nd, a local resident noticed a suspicious individual lurking around a neighbor's property and promptly called the police. Officer Gomez arrived on the scene and detained the individual. The description of the suspect matched:
Burglary 4 (December 22) - Male, Hispanic, mid-20s, 5'9", 160 pounds, brown hair, wearing a grey hoodie and jeans, sneakers.

Based on the descriptions given in the first three reports, should the suspect detained in Burglary 4 also be considered a suspect in the previous burglaries?

Correct! Wrong!

Explanation:
The suspect detained in Burglary 4 matches the descriptions of the perpetrators from Burglaries 1 and 3 in terms of ethnicity, age, height, weight, and clothing. While there are some discrepancies in the descriptions, such as hair color, these can be attributed to variations in observation and reporting. Therefore, the suspect should be considered a potential suspect in Burglaries 1 and 3, but not necessarily in Burglary 2.

Related Post