It can be most reasonably inferred from the passage that which one of the following is an example of stealing thunder?
avifJune 14, 2020
Why B? Why not E?
I don't understand this question. I eliminated B because I thought that we don't know if the other side would have capitalized on this information or knew about it at all. E, on the other hand, says something which is relevant to the case, which perhaps the other side knows, yet the lawyer is revealing it in the best light.
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Thanks for the question! So the question is asking for an example of stealing thunder, and we should refer to the very beginning lines where we’re told what stealing thunder is. It’s basically where you reveal negative information about yourself before the other side can to soften the blow of that negative information, if you think the negative information’s going to get out there anyway.
Now let’s take a look at (E). In this case, a lawyer stresses that one’s client, while technically guilty, is believable and that mitigating circumstances should be considered. This isn’t really a case of stealing thunder because you can’t really “reveal” guilt since that’s what’s being determined, so it’s more asking for mercy than revealing anything hidden about your client.
(B), on the other hand, is much closer, since it’s giving away a weakness—that the client has been guilty of plagiarism in the past. This is very similar to the definition of stealing thunder given in the passage. It doesn’t matter if the other side actually knows about it or would’ve capitalized on it; the key part is revealing negative information about yourself in case someone else does it later.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
avifJune 15, 2020
I think it does although I still struggle with it a bit. Thanks so much for the quick response!
