Question

Ms. White, who lives in a village in the countryside, was brought before the village's court for the third time in the past six months due to not picking up after her dog. She pleaded innocence but was found guilty and fined $200, which she paid, as happened the previous two times.

There were two consecutive months during the past six months when Ms. White properly picked up after her dog.
a. True
b. Probably true
c.Insufficient Data
d. Probably false
e. False

Answer 1

Probably false. Ms. White was brought before the village's court for not picking up after her dog three times in the past six months, suggesting a pattern of non-compliance.

Option D is answer.

Step-by-step explanation:

The information provided indicates that Ms. White has been brought to the village court three times in the past six months for not picking up after her dog. Additionally, it mentions that she pleaded innocence but was found guilty and fined $200 each time, including the most recent incident. The fact that she was fined for the same offense in three separate instances within a six-month period suggests a recurring issue rather than a one-time occurrence.

While it is mentioned that there were two consecutive months when Ms. White properly picked up after her dog, this doesn't negate the pattern of non-compliance reflected in the repeated court appearances. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the statement "Ms. White properly picked up after her dog" applies to a specific two-month period within the six months but doesn't necessarily disprove the recurring nature of the problem.

Option D (Probably false) is the answer.