LAPD Logical and Deductive Reasoning 3 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: An officer observes: 'Whenever it rains, traffic incidents on the 101 increase.' There are no increased traffic incidents today. What is the most logical conclusion?
- It is raining today
- It is not raining today (Correct answer)
- The 101 freeway is closed
- Traffic data is unavailable
Correct answer: It is not raining today
If rain caused incidents and there are no extra incidents, rain has not occurred — contrapositive reasoning.
Question 2: Detectives know that only employees with keycard access can enter the server room. The suspect does not have keycard access. What follows?
- The suspect entered through a different route
- The suspect did not enter the server room (Correct answer)
- The suspect borrowed a keycard
- The suspect is innocent of all charges
Correct answer: The suspect did not enter the server room
Without keycard access, entering the server room is impossible under the stated rule.
Question 3: At a crime scene, footprints A and B are found. Print A belongs to the victim. Print B is size 11. The suspect wears size 9. What is the most logical inference?
- The suspect left Print B
- Print B does not match the suspect's shoe size (Correct answer)
- The suspect was not at the scene
- The victim wore size 11 shoes
Correct answer: Print B does not match the suspect's shoe size
Print B is size 11 and the suspect wears size 9, so Print B does not match the suspect.
Question 4: All robbery suspects in this case were wearing dark clothing. Witness B says the person they saw wore bright orange. What can be deduced?
- The person in orange is the primary suspect
- The person in orange is not one of the robbery suspects in this case (Correct answer)
- The witness is lying
- More suspects were involved
Correct answer: The person in orange is not one of the robbery suspects in this case
If all suspects wore dark clothing and this person wore orange, they do not fit the suspect profile established in this case.
Question 5: Officer Kim must either write the incident report or conduct the follow-up interview, but her supervisor says she did NOT conduct the follow-up interview. What follows?
- Officer Kim did neither task
- Officer Kim wrote the incident report (Correct answer)
- Officer Kim conducted both tasks
- The supervisor is incorrect
Correct answer: Officer Kim wrote the incident report
With an inclusive or and one option eliminated, the other must be true.
Question 6: A series of thefts occurred on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A theft is reported on Sunday. Which statement best applies logical analysis?
- Sunday's theft is unrelated because it breaks the pattern
- Sunday's theft proves the pattern was wrong
- Sunday's theft may or may not be related — additional evidence is needed (Correct answer)
- The thief changed their schedule deliberately
Correct answer: Sunday's theft may or may not be related — additional evidence is needed
A pattern deviation alone is insufficient to confirm or deny connection without further evidence.
Question 7: Statements: 'Some detectives are also certified trainers. All certified trainers attend the annual conference.' Which conclusion is definitely true?
- All detectives attend the annual conference
- Some detectives attend the annual conference (Correct answer)
- No detectives attend the annual conference
- Certified trainers are not detectives
Correct answer: Some detectives attend the annual conference
The detectives who are certified trainers must attend the conference, so at least some detectives attend.
LAPD Logical and Deductive Reasoning 3
An officer observes: 'Whenever it rains, traffic incidents on the 101 increase.' There are no increased traffic incidents today.
What is the most logical conclusion?