State Trooper Reading Comprehension and Logic Questions and Answers

Question 1

Read the following passage from a fictional department policy: 'General Order 301.5: Officers shall not accept any gratuity or gift which could be reasonably interpreted as a reward for their position or which may compromise their impartiality. Unsolicited items of nominal value, such as a cup of coffee or a bottled water, may be accepted.' Trooper Smith is offered a 50% discount on a new set of tires by a local mechanic who says, 'I appreciate the work you troopers do to keep us safe.' According to this policy, what is the most appropriate action for Trooper Smith?

Accepted Answer

Politely decline the discount as it is of more than nominal value and could be seen as a reward.

Answer

The policy prohibits gifts that are more than 'nominal value' and could be interpreted as a reward. A 50% discount on a set of tires has significant monetary value, far exceeding the examples of a coffee or water. Therefore, accepting it would violate the policy.

Question 2

An eyewitness to a vehicle break-in gives the following statement: 'I saw a person in a grey sweatshirt quickly walk up to the red car, smash the passenger window, and grab a laptop from the front seat. The person then ran south down Oak Street. It all happened so fast, I couldn't tell if it was a man or a woman.' Based only on this statement, which of the following is a certain fact?

Accepted Answer

The stolen item was a laptop computer.

Answer

The witness statement explicitly says the suspect grabbed a laptop. The other options are assumptions. The time of day is not mentioned, it's unknown if the suspect had an accomplice waiting, and the window was smashed, making the car's lock status irrelevant to the entry.

Question 3

Review the following paragraph from a trooper's report: 'The suspect was apprehended after a short foot pursuit. He was clearly deceptive during my initial questioning. He kept looking away and his story about where he was going didn't make sense. Therefore, he must be guilty of the burglary we were investigating.' What is the primary logical flaw in the trooper's conclusion?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion is a non sequitur; the premise does not logically lead to the conclusion.

Answer

A non sequitur is a conclusion that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement. While deceptive behavior and an odd story are grounds for suspicion and further investigation, they do not, by themselves, logically prove guilt for a specific burglary. The conclusion ('he must be guilty') is an illogical leap from the evidence presented (nervous behavior).

Question 4

Analyze the following dispatch log entries: 22:10 - Report of loud music at 123 Pine St. 22:12 - Trooper Davis assigned. 22:21 - Trooper Davis on scene, requests backup for a large, hostile crowd. 22:23 - Sgt. Rios and Trooper Chen en route as backup. 22:25 - Witness calls dispatch, states a physical fight broke out at the party 'a few minutes before' the first trooper arrived. 22:30 - Backup units on scene. Based on this log, what can be logically inferred?

Accepted Answer

The physical fight started at approximately 22:18.

Answer

Trooper Davis arrived at 22:21. The witness stated the fight broke out 'a few minutes before' his arrival. Subtracting a few minutes (e.g., 3 minutes) from 22:21 gives an approximate time of 22:18. The other options are either not supported or contradicted by the log.

Question 5

A state statute defines 'Prowling' as: 'A person commits an offense if they loiter or prowl in a place, at a time, or in a manner not usual for law-abiding individuals under circumstances that warrant a justifiable and reasonable alarm or immediate concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity.' A trooper observes a man in a jogging suit stretching on a public sidewalk at 10:00 AM. The man then jogs down the street. Based strictly on the statute, has the man committed Prowling?

Accepted Answer

No, because his actions were usual for a law-abiding individual and did not warrant alarm.

Answer

The statute requires the behavior to be unusual for law-abiding individuals AND warrant reasonable alarm. Jogging and stretching in public during the daytime is a very common, usual activity for law-abiding citizens and would not cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety or the safety of their property.

State Trooper Practice Test

State Trooper Practice Test

State Trooper Reading Comprehension and Logic Questions and Answers