All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >   Directions: The question below has blanks, e... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.
_______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicted
  • a)
    from, of, over
  • b)
    in, for, under
  • c)
    from, after, under
  • d)
    since, of, over
  • e)
    since, for, under
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that...
Explanation:

The sentence talks about the period of time after the arrest of Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff, during which unidentified "former prosecutors," "criminal lawyers who have followed the case," and "legal sources" were frequently quoted in the media.

Blank 1:
The sentence mentions the time period immediately following the arrest. The correct word to use here is "from," which indicates the starting point of the time period.

Blank 2:
The sentence refers to the time period after the arrest, so the correct word to use here is "after." This indicates that the events described in the sentence occurred subsequent to the arrest.

Blank 3:
The sentence states that the individuals mentioned in the media were asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were under investigation and would soon be indicted. The phrase "under investigation" suggests that they were being investigated by the authorities. Therefore, the correct word to use here is "under."

Therefore, the correct set of words for the blanks is "from, after, under" (option C).
Free Test
FREE
Start Free Test
Start Free Test
Community Answer
Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that...
Preposition 'from' is used in the following cases:
  • in the sense of where from
  • who gave it
  • preposition 'after' and 'under' will be suitable for second and third blanks
Attention CAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

DIRECTIONS for the question : Read the passage and answer the question based on it.Much remained a mystery about Bernie Madoff s crime, even after he pleaded guilty in March 2009. But one thing, it seemed, that everybody knew was true was this: his wife and sons were guilty too. From the first weeks after his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were under investigation and would soon be indicted. Glossy magazine articles would speculate carefully; garish Internet blogs would accuse recklessly; television commentators would wink and nod knowingly. All that fierce, smug certainty about their guilt-unsupported by any cited facts-effectively drove Madoff s immediate family into exile.In an era of hypermedia, with mobile phone paparazzi and self-defined Internet commentators constantly on the alert for ways to attract attention, it is worth noting that these attacks on the Madoff family were a sharp departure from the typical public reaction to cases of white-collar crime, going back more than a century.Of course, such criminals-confidence men, embezzlers, crooked politicians, fraudsters of all kinds-were attacked savagely by the press and the public when their crimes came to light. But their wives and children were almost never included in those attacks; rather they were almost always ignored or, at the very least, quickly left alone. There were a few exceptions where criminal charges were actually filed against a close relative, who was then pulled to the whipping post of public attention. In general, however, even the wives and children of executed murderers were left to rebuild their lives in relative obscurity, unless they sought the spotlight themselves.The treatment over the years of organized-crime defendants is instructive. Despite widespread fascination with the murderous escapades of so-called "Mafia dons" and crime-family "capos", it was extremely rare for any attention to fall on the elderly Mrs. Mafia Don or the capos children-even though a realist might have wondered how much they knew about why their husband or father had asked all his closest buddies to wear guns and sleep on mattresses in the garage. On rare occasions, a mobsters relatives actively courted publicity. But those who didnt were routinely ignored by the media and certainly were never publicly and repeatedly accused of complicity in their husbands or fathers crimes.Yet the public outcry against Ruth Madoff and her sons began almost from the instant of Madoffs arrest and did not cease. By the time he pleaded guilty, it was deafening.From the beginning, however, there were facts in the Madotf case that just didnt seem to be consistent with the familys guilt. First, there was the fact that none of them fled the country. Perhaps Bernie Madoff, seventy years old at the time of his confession, felt too old and tired to leave as a wealthy fugitive; and perhaps Ruth, even if she were guilty and faced arrest and a lifelong imprisonment, would not leave without him. But his two sons, if they were guilty, had the opportunity, the means, and the motive to flee. The end was clearly in sight weeks in advance, there was still a princely sum in the bank, and they and their families were relatively young and portable. Surely, Madoff, before turning himself in, would have handed his sons the keys to the company jet and enough cash to let them live comfortably beyond the reach of the law for the rest of their lives. After all, if they were his accomplices, their only other option would have been to stay and go to prison. And yet Madoff did not flee- and neither did his wife or sons.Then, there was his confession. Some hostile theorists immediately argued that Madoff and his guilty sons staged his confession so they could turn him in and thereby deflect suspicion from themselves. But this would have been a worthless gesture unless they all could have been absolutely sure that no incriminating evidence would surface later and none of their other low-levelaccomplices would finger the sons in a bid for leniency-assumptions that were not remotely realistic if the sons were actually guilty. Moreover, if Madoff truly believed anyone could be insulated from suspicion simply by turning himself in, wouldnt he have arranged for that to be Ruth?Logic aside, assumptions about the familys guilt began to run up against the fact that, as the Madoff investigation progressed, the predicted arrests of his wife and sons simply did not happen.Q.What is the point the author has highlighted in the given passage?

DIRECTIONS for the question : Read the passage and answer the question based on it.Much remained a mystery about Bernie Madoff s crime, even after he pleaded guilty in March 2009. But one thing, it seemed, that everybody knew was true was this: his wife and sons were guilty too. From the first weeks after his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were under investigation and would soon be indicted. Glossy magazine articles would speculate carefully; garish Internet blogs would accuse recklessly; television commentators would wink and nod knowingly. All that fierce, smug certainty about their guilt-unsupported by any cited facts-effectively drove Madoff s immediate family into exile.In an era of hypermedia, with mobile phone paparazzi and self-defined Internet commentators constantly on the alert for ways to attract attention, it is worth noting that these attacks on the Madoff family were a sharp departure from the typical public reaction to cases of white-collar crime, going back more than a century.Of course, such criminals-confidence men, embezzlers, crooked politicians, fraudsters of all kinds-were attacked savagely by the press and the public when their crimes came to light. But their wives and children were almost never included in those attacks; rather they were almost always ignored or, at the very least, quickly left alone. There were a few exceptions where criminal charges were actually filed against a close relative, who was then pulled to the whipping post of public attention. In general, however, even the wives and children of executed murderers were left to rebuild their lives in relative obscurity, unless they sought the spotlight themselves.The treatment over the years of organized-crime defendants is instructive. Despite widespread fascination with the murderous escapades of so-called "Mafia dons" and crime-family "capos", it was extremely rare for any attention to fall on the elderly Mrs. Mafia Don or the capos children-even though a realist might have wondered how much they knew about why their husband or father had asked all his closest buddies to wear guns and sleep on mattresses in the garage. On rare occasions, a mobsters relatives actively courted publicity. But those who didnt were routinely ignored by the media and certainly were never publicly and repeatedly accused of complicity in their husbands or fathers crimes.Yet the public outcry against Ruth Madoff and her sons began almost from the instant of Madoffs arrest and did not cease. By the time he pleaded guilty, it was deafening.From the beginning, however, there were facts in the Madotf case that just didnt seem to be consistent with the familys guilt. First, there was the fact that none of them fled the country. Perhaps Bernie Madoff, seventy years old at the time of his confession, felt too old and tired to leave as a wealthy fugitive; and perhaps Ruth, even if she were guilty and faced arrest and a lifelong imprisonment, would not leave without him. But his two sons, if they were guilty, had the opportunity, the means, and the motive to flee. The end was clearly in sight weeks in advance, there was still a princely sum in the bank, and they and their families were relatively young and portable. Surely, Madoff, before turning himself in, would have handed his sons the keys to the company jet and enough cash to let them live comfortably beyond the reach of the law for the rest of their lives. After all, if they were his accomplices, their only other option would have been to stay and go to prison. And yet Madoff did not flee- and neither did his wife or sons.Then, there was his confession. Some hostile theorists immediately argued that Madoff and his guilty sons staged his confession so they could turn him in and thereby deflect suspicion from themselves. But this would have been a worthless gesture unless they all could have been absolutely sure that no incriminating evidence would surface later and none of their other low-levelaccomplices would finger the sons in a bid for leniency-assumptions that were not remotely realistic if the sons were actually guilty. Moreover, if Madoff truly believed anyone could be insulated from suspicion simply by turning himself in, wouldnt he have arranged for that to be Ruth?Logic aside, assumptions about the familys guilt began to run up against the fact that, as the Madoff investigation progressed, the predicted arrests of his wife and sons simply did not happen.Q.Which of the following sentences is incorrect?

DIRECTIONS for the question : Read the passage and answer the question based on it.Much remained a mystery about Bernie Madoff s crime, even after he pleaded guilty in March 2009. But one thing, it seemed, that everybody knew was true was this: his wife and sons were guilty too. From the first weeks after his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were under investigation and would soon be indicted. Glossy magazine articles would speculate carefully; garish Internet blogs would accuse recklessly; television commentators would wink and nod knowingly. All that fierce, smug certainty about their guilt-unsupported by any cited facts-effectively drove Madoff s immediate family into exile.In an era of hypermedia, with mobile phone paparazzi and self-defined Internet commentators constantly on the alert for ways to attract attention, it is worth noting that these attacks on the Madoff family were a sharp departure from the typical public reaction to cases of white-collar crime, going back more than a century.Of course, such criminals-confidence men, embezzlers, crooked politicians, fraudsters of all kinds-were attacked savagely by the press and the public when their crimes came to light. But their wives and children were almost never included in those attacks; rather they were almost always ignored or, at the very least, quickly left alone. There were a few exceptions where criminal charges were actually filed against a close relative, who was then pulled to the whipping post of public attention. In general, however, even the wives and children of executed murderers were left to rebuild their lives in relative obscurity, unless they sought the spotlight themselves.The treatment over the years of organized-crime defendants is instructive. Despite widespread fascination with the murderous escapades of so-called "Mafia dons" and crime-family "capos", it was extremely rare for any attention to fall on the elderly Mrs. Mafia Don or the capos children-even though a realist might have wondered how much they knew about why their husband or father had asked all his closest buddies to wear guns and sleep on mattresses in the garage. On rare occasions, a mobsters relatives actively courted publicity. But those who didnt were routinely ignored by the media and certainly were never publicly and repeatedly accused of complicity in their husbands or fathers crimes.Yet the public outcry against Ruth Madoff and her sons began almost from the instant of Madoffs arrest and did not cease. By the time he pleaded guilty, it was deafening.From the beginning, however, there were facts in the Madotf case that just didnt seem to be consistent with the familys guilt. First, there was the fact that none of them fled the country. Perhaps Bernie Madoff, seventy years old at the time of his confession, felt too old and tired to leave as a wealthy fugitive; and perhaps Ruth, even if she were guilty and faced arrest and a lifelong imprisonment, would not leave without him. But his two sons, if they were guilty, had the opportunity, the means, and the motive to flee. The end was clearly in sight weeks in advance, there was still a princely sum in the bank, and they and their families were relatively young and portable. Surely, Madoff, before turning himself in, would have handed his sons the keys to the company jet and enough cash to let them live comfortably beyond the reach of the law for the rest of their lives. After all, if they were his accomplices, their only other option would have been to stay and go to prison. And yet Madoff did not flee- and neither did his wife or sons.Then, there was his confession. Some hostile theorists immediately argued that Madoff and his guilty sons staged his confession so they could turn him in and thereby deflect suspicion from themselves. But this would have been a worthless gesture unless they all could have been absolutely sure that no incriminating evidence would surface later and none of their other low-levelaccomplices would finger the sons in a bid for leniency-assumptions that were not remotely realistic if the sons were actually guilty. Moreover, if Madoff truly believed anyone could be insulated from suspicion simply by turning himself in, wouldnt he have arranged for that to be Ruth?Logic aside, assumptions about the familys guilt began to run up against the fact that, as the Madoff investigation progressed, the predicted arrests of his wife and sons simply did not happen.Q.How did the family of Bernie Madoff react to media frenzy declaring them guilty?

Top Courses for CATView all

Top Courses for CAT

Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The question below has blanks, each blank indicating that something has been omitted. Choose the set of words for each blank which best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole._______ the first weeks ______ his arrest, unidentified "former prosecutors" and "criminal lawyers who have followed the case" and "legal sources" were repeatedly quoted in various media outlets asserting that Ruth, Mark, and Andrew Madoff were _____ investigation and would soon be indicteda)from, of, overb)in, for, underc)from, after, underd)since, of, overe)since, for, underCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup