At the end of each day, Mr. Red takes a bag holding the daily earnings of his business to the bank. A week ago, when Mr. Red arrived at the bank, he noticed that the bag had been replaced by another similar bag, but one without any earnings in it. Mr. Red accused Mr. Green, a competitor, of the robbery. However, on that specific day Mr. Green claims to have been playing golf on a course far from Mr. Red's offices. Therefore, Mr. Green cannot be guilty of stealing the earnings.
Which of the following would it be most useful to establish in order to evaluate the argument?
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]The answer to this question would not affect Mr. Green's status as a suspect in the robbery. We cannot assume that if he had stolen the money, he would deposit it into his bank account. Also, it is perfectly legitimate to have a large sum of money in the bank anyway.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This question is irrelevant. It is the fact that Mr. Green was at the golf course that can strengthen his claim. It doesn't matter whether it was his first or hundredth time there.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]Although the origin of the bag may lead to further clues in this case, knowing whether both bags are from the same store alone would not directly affect Mr. Green's status as a suspect.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]The conclusion focuses on Mr. Green's position as a suspect. Therefore, Mr. Red's claims are not in question, especially since they are presented to us as premises, and should be regarded as factual evidence.
Yes!
[[snippet]]This answer choice suggests a way to test Mr. Green's side of the story. If someone can testify that they had seen Mr. Green playing golf, then his position would be strengthened. If no such witness can be found, then he has no evidence to prove himself innocent.