Statement–Argument — Is the verdict of a judge always just and right? Arguments: I) Yes; judges are very learned and intelligent. II) No; tricky lawyers and false evidence can mislead the judge. Choose the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:
The issue is whether judicial verdicts are invariably correct. Strong arguments should address systemic possibilities for error rather than relying on authority alone.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Courts operate on evidence, procedure, and advocacy.
• Erroneous or fabricated evidence and skillful advocacy can distort fact-finding.
• Appeals and review processes exist precisely because errors can occur.

Concept / Approach:
Argument I is an appeal to authority: judges’ intelligence does not guarantee infallibility. Argument II points to mechanisms by which wrong outcomes happen, providing a direct reason against the “always” claim; thus II is strong.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
The existence of appellate courts and remedies like review or revision corroborates II’s logic.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Either” would treat I as strong; it is not. “Neither” ignores II’s cogent reasoning.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing respect for judiciary with a claim of absolute correctness.

Final Answer:
if only Argument II is strong.