POST Reading and Reasoning Ability 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A policy reads: 'Officers shall not conduct searches without consent, a warrant, or an applicable exception. Exigent circumstances are a recognized exception.' An officer hears screaming inside a residence and forcibly enters without a warrant or consent. This action is:
- Prohibited because no warrant was obtained
- Justified because exigent circumstances apply (Correct answer)
- Prohibited because consent was not given
- Justified only if a supervisor approves
Correct answer: Justified because exigent circumstances apply
Screaming inside a residence suggests an emergency, which qualifies as exigent circumstances — a recognized exception under the stated policy.
Question 2: Which word is closest in meaning to 'corroborate' as used in the sentence: 'The physical evidence helped to corroborate the witness's account of events'?
- Contradict
- Confirm (Correct answer)
- Replace
- Dismiss
Correct answer: Confirm
'Corroborate' means to confirm or support a claim with additional evidence.
Question 3: An officer is given this information: 'Crime A occurred between 1400 and 1600. Crime B occurred after Crime A. Crime C occurred before Crime A.' What is the correct chronological order?
- A, B, C
- C, A, B (Correct answer)
- B, A, C
- C, B, A
Correct answer: C, A, B
Crime C happened before A, and Crime B happened after A, placing the order as C → A → B.
Question 4: A memorandum states: 'Plain-clothes officers conducting undercover operations must notify their supervisor before making an arrest, unless doing so would compromise the operation or create imminent danger.' An undercover officer witnesses a violent assault. Notification before arrest is:
- Required in all undercover situations
- Not required because imminent danger is present (Correct answer)
- Required because a supervisor must always approve arrests
- Not required only in narcotics operations
Correct answer: Not required because imminent danger is present
A violent assault creates imminent danger, which is one of the two exceptions that waive the pre-arrest notification requirement.
Question 5: A passage states: 'Eyewitness identifications, while often compelling to juries, have been shown by research to be a leading cause of wrongful convictions.' Which conclusion is most directly supported?
- Eyewitness testimony should never be used in criminal trials
- Eyewitness identifications can be unreliable and should be carefully evaluated (Correct answer)
- Juries are incapable of evaluating evidence
- Research has eliminated all wrongful convictions
Correct answer: Eyewitness identifications can be unreliable and should be carefully evaluated
The passage supports cautious evaluation of eyewitness identifications because of their documented link to wrongful convictions, not their complete elimination.
Question 6: An officer reads a bulletin: 'Be on the lookout for a female suspect, early 30s, 5'4", medium build, with long red hair and a distinctive tattoo of a star on her left hand. She was last seen wearing a green coat.' An officer spots a woman in her early 30s, 5'4", with long red hair, wearing a blue jacket. She has a tattoo on her left hand, but it appears to be a flower. How many descriptors match?
- Three
- Four (Correct answer)
- Five
- Two
Correct answer: Four
Age range, height, hair color, and left-hand tattoo all match (four details); build is not confirmed, coat color differs, and the tattoo design does not match.
Question 7: The following argument is presented: 'If crime rates are high, the community is unsafe. Crime rates in District 7 are low. Therefore, District 7 is safe.' This reasoning is:
- Valid, because low crime proves safety
- Invalid, because low crime rates do not necessarily mean a district is safe — other factors may exist (Correct answer)
- Valid, because the premises logically guarantee the conclusion
- Invalid, because crime rates are irrelevant to safety
Correct answer: Invalid, because low crime rates do not necessarily mean a district is safe — other factors may exist
This is the logical fallacy of denying the antecedent; the original statement only tells us what high crime implies, not what low crime proves.
POST Reading and Reasoning Ability 5
A policy reads: 'Officers shall not conduct searches without consent, a warrant, or an applicable exception.
Exigent circumstances are a recognized exception.' An officer hears screaming inside a residence and forcibly enters without a warrant or consent.
This action is: