Critical reasoning — road safety and accidents: A serious car accident has again focused attention on the unsatisfactory state of roads; decide whether the accident was fatal and whether multiple accidents have occurred due to bad roads

Given data

• Statement: A serious accident in which a person was run down by a car has again focused attention on the most unsatisfactory state of roads.
• Conclusions:
  • I: The accident was fatal.
  • II: Several accidents have so far taken place because of unsatisfactory roads.

Concept/Approach

'Run down' implies the person was hit, not necessarily killed. 'Again focused attention' indicates prior similar concerns, reasonably linked to multiple earlier incidents.

Step-by-Step logic1) I does not follow: 'serious' ≠ 'fatal'; no death stated.2) II follows: 'again' signals recurring attention, which is best explained by several prior accidents attributable to poor roads.

Verification/Alternative

Even if earlier attention came from audits or public complaints, the natural reading in accident context is that prior accidents prompted earlier focus.

Common pitfalls

• Equating severity with fatality.
• Ignoring the temporal cue 'again' that implies repetition.

Final AnswerOnly conclusion II follows.