Engels

MINISTERIE VAN ONDERWIJS EN VOLKSONTWIKKELING EXAMENBUREAU

UNIFORM EINDEXAMEN MULO

tevens

TOELATINGSEXAMEN VWO/HAVO/NATIN 2009

DATUM: MAANDAG 06 JULI 2009 TIJD : 07.45 – 09.15 UUR

DEZE TAAK BESTAAT UIT 1 TEKST EN 35 VRAGEN.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Tom Smart came out of Salt Lake City police headquarters looking pale, thin and tired. He’d just finished a session with investigators asking questions about the disappearance of his niece, 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart; she had been snatched from her bed in the middle of the night June 5 by an armed man in a yellowish brown cap. Now investigators were trying to find out where the family members had been at the time of the disappearance of Elizabeth. The police had just questioned Tom, a 48-year-old photo editor at the Deseret News, a daily paper owned by the Mormon Church. Sitting on a bench in the lobby after giving fingerprints and blood samples, Tom promised full cooperation with investigators. “It’s all right, tear me apart, if you have to as long as it will help solve the mystery,” Smart told NEWSWEEK.

Frustrated police and many volunteers continued to search the Utah’s deserts and mountains for Elizabeth and her kidnapper; and investigators turned their attention to the missing teen’s family trying to shake something—anything—loose. Elizabeth’s father, Edward Smart, who underwent a polygraph test, came out clean. Polygraphs for other members of the well-known Mormon family, including Tom Smart, were “inconclusive,” a source said. An inconclusive test hardly means that a person is guilty of a crime—or even of trying to hide something. It indicates only that the person neither failed nor completely passed the polygraph. Officials say they have no plans to give a second test to Tom – whose wife, Heidi, says that he was in bed with her all night the evening Elizabeth disappeared.

Is it possible that the man whom police are hunting for and who was seen only by the frightened 9-year-old sister, who shared a bedroom with Elizabeth, wasn’t a stranger, but kin? Police carefully examined close relatives last week, but at the same time, they tried to find and question a mysterious drifter. He had attended a candlelight vigil for the missing blond teenager. “We decided to take a hard look at the family,” the police said. On Friday teams of FBI agents spread out to check the stories of family members and tried to learn where each one was in the hours before and after Elizabeth’s disappearance.

Focusing on the family is normal in child kidnapping cases. And for good reason: in almost half the cases, the kidnapper is a relative, according to one study of l997 cases. “You want to eliminate or reduce the possibility [that a family member did it] as quickly as possible,” says Kenneth Lanning, a retired supervisor in the FBI’s Crimes Against Children section. Salt Lake City police have repeatedly said they have no suspects yet, and that looking at the Smart clan is just “one among many theories,” according to Capt. Scott Atkinson, the lead police spokesman. “The family has been very cooperative,” Atkinson says.

Investigators did not only question the Smarts. By late last week, 60 police officers and 40 FBI agents had examined thousands of leads. One was a 26-year-old homeless drifter named Bret Michael Edmunds, whom police want to question because he was spotted driving slowly in the neighborhood just two mornings before the kidnapping, and later appeared at Elizabeth’s vigil. Police stressed that Edmunds, who was wanted for fraud and attacking an officer, isn’t a

39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Elizabeth’s sister is only 5 feet 8. In spite of this, the search for Edmunds turned into an intensive manhunt by the end of the week, after boys playing in some cattails in a northern Salt Lake suburb found his discarded license plates. On Friday, authorities were certain that they had arrested Edmunds shoplifting from a department store in the Texas Panhandle, but the fingerprints did not match.

There are troubling questions about how a stranger could have broken into the Smarts’ million-dollar home and known exactly which of the seven bedrooms was Elizabeth’s. The Salt Lake Tribune reported Thursday that some investigators now think the screen on the kitchen window where the kidnapper was supposed to have entered was cut from the inside, a sign that the break-in may have been staged. But police told NEWSWEEK that they “have no evidence of that.” In spite of this investigators are puzzled by how someone could have squeezed through the window, which is tall but not very wide and opens with a crank. “We’re not so confident about how he got in,” a source tells NEWSWEEK.

It didn’t help investigators that the crime scene was disturbed before they could even set about their work. Elizabeth’s parents apparently had called friends and neighbors to start looking for the girl before they phoned police at 4:01 a.m. By the time investigators arrived, several neighbors were already walking around the Smart house, and others were searching the neighborhood, leaving shoe marks, clothing fibers and fingerprints behind. Protecting the crime scene is a problem in a lot of cases, says Lanning, the retired FBI supervisor. In the still-unsolved JonBenet Ramsey case police were highly criticized for lax handling of the crime scene in the early hours. Says-Lanning: “All that investigators can do is deal with the reality they face.” In Elizabeth Smart’s case, the sad reality is that nobody gave investigators much of a hand at all.

Adapted from: NEWSWEEK June 24, 2002

Notes:

Line 13: polygraph = (lie detector) a piece of equipment that is used, for example by the police, to find out if somebody is telling the truth

Line 22: vigil = a period of time when people stay awake, especially at night, in order to say prayers, protest, etc.

1

Lines 1-3: “Tom Smart … Smart; …” These lines tell us the following about Tom Smart EXCEPT:

A He had just been arrested. B He had just been questioned. C He looked ill.

D He looked tired.

2

Which of the following statements about Elizabeth Smart is TRUE?

A She could be a victim of kidnapping. B She could be involved in a kidnapping. C She had a restless night as usual. D She was a victim of kidnapping.

3

The word “snatched” (line 3) is similar in meaning to the following EXCEPT A taken roughly.

B taken rudely. C taken with caution. D taken with force.

4

Lines 4-6: “Now investigators … photo editor…” From these lines we may conclude that police A thought that questioning Elizabeth’s uncle was enough to solve the case.

B were convinced that all the family members of Elizabeth were involved in her

disappearance.

C were convinced that Elizabeth’s uncle knew a lot more about her disappearance .

D would continue their investigation by questioning all the other family members of Elizabeth.

5

Lines 5-7: “ The police … Church.”

Which of the following statements about Tom is FALSE?

A He is probably a member of the Mormon Church.

B He is the owner of a daily paper.

C He prepares the photos to be published in the Deseret News.

D He works for the Deseret News.

6

Line 8: “ … Tom promised full cooperation with investigators.”

This means that Tom was … to help investigators.

Which of the following does NOT fit? A prepared

B ready C reluctant D willing

7

“tear me apart” (line 8) is similar in meaning to

A do with me whatever you want. B frighten me as much as you want. C scare me whenever you want. D scold me as much as you want.

8

Line 9: “ … as long as it will solve the mystery,” Smart told NEWSWEEK. The word “mystery” is used to refer to

A the disappearance of his niece (lines 2-3). B an armed man (line 4).

C a man in a yellowish brown cap (line 4). D where the family members had been (line 5).

Line 10: “Frustrated police …”

Police were probably frustrated because A not everybody had promised to fully cooperate with investigators.

B not everybody had volunteered to search for the missing Elizabeth.

C they did not know what to do to solve the disappearance of Elizabeth.

D they had not succeeded in solving the disappearance of Elizabeth yet.

10

Lines 11-12: “ … investigators … loose.” Investigators tried to shake something – anything – loose from Elizabeth’s family. This sentence indicates that investigators A tried to force Elizabeth’s family to confess. B tried to frighten Elizabeth’s family into confessing.

C tried to get all possible information about Elizabeth from her family.

D tried to prove that Elizabeth’s family had deliberately kept information from them.

11

Lines 12-13: “…Edward Smart … clean.” Edward Smart came out clean means that he had been …

Which of the following does NOT fit? A clear

B honest C sincere D truthful

Lines 13-16: “Polygraphs … polygraph.” From these lines, we may conclude the following about the polygraphs.

A They were done hastily. B They were done incorrectly. C They were of no use to the police. D They were of some use to the police.

13

Line 16: “It indicates … .” “It” refers to

A a polygraph test (line 13). B a source (line 14).

C an inconclusive test (line 15). D a crime (line 15).

14

We may conclude that officials say they have no plans to give Tom a second test because A it would be foolish.

B it would be useless.

C of the result of the first test.

D of the statement made by his wife.

15

Lines 19-20: “Is it possible … kin?” These lines suggest that the kidnapper of Elizabeth could have been a

A foreigner. B friend. C neighbor. D relative.

16

The word “mysterious” (line 22) tells us the following about the drifter.

A Nobody knew anything about him. B Nobody talked much about him.

C Nobody wanted to reveal anything about him. D Nobody wanted to talk about him.

17

The word “attended” (line 22) is similar in meaning to A organized. B planned. C prepared. D visited. 18

“… take a hard look at the family …” (line 23) is similar in meaning to

A examine the family carefully. B examine the family occasionally. C look at the family seriously. D look for the family everywhere.

19

Line 27: “… one study of 1997 cases.” The study of 1997 cases has shown that A focusing on the family is normal in child kidnapping cases.

B in almost half the cases, the kidnapper is a relative.

C the possibility that a family member is the kidnapper must be eliminated.

D the possibility that a family member is the kidnapper must be reduced.

20

Which of the following statements about Kenneth Lanning is NOT true?

A He had already stopped working.

B He had supervised the study of 1997 cases. C He used to be the head of an FBI department. D He used to work for the FBI.

21

Lines 29-30: “Salt Lake … suspects yet…” These lines tell us that police

A had some indication about the identity of the kidnapper.

B were in the dark about the identity of the kidnapper.

C were in the dark about the whereabouts of the kidnapper.

D will be informed yet about the whereabouts of the kidnapper.

22

Lines 26-31: “Focusing … ‘one among many theories’ …”

What theories are probably meant? Theories about

A preventing the kidnapping of a child. B punishing the kidnapper of a child. C solving the kidnapping of a child. D talking to the kidnapper of a child.

23

Police probably wanted to question Bret Michael Edmunds for the following reasons

EXCEPT:

A He was a young homeless drifter and Elizabeth’s kidnapper.

B He was one of the leads in the kidnapping of Elizabeth.

C He was seen at the vigil held for Elizabeth. D He was seen in Salt Lake City two days before the kidnapping of Elizabeth.

According to police, Bret should be arrested for two of the following reasons:

1. attacking the police force;

2. attempting to deceive some people; 3. cheating some people;

4. using violence against somebody; They are: A 1 + 2 B 1 + 4 C 2 + 3 D 3 + 4 25

The phrase “for one thing” in line 38 is similar in meaning to

A one of the consequences. B one of the purposes. C one of the reasons. D one of the results.

26

Lines 39-41: “In spite … plates.” From these lines we may conclude that Edmunds

A had changed the license plates of his car. B had his license plates put on another car. C had lost the license plates of his car. D had tried to destroy the license plates of his car.

27

Lines 41-43: “ On Friday … match.” From these lines we may conclude that the authorities had mistaken

A Edmunds’ fingerprints for somebody else’s. B Edmunds for somebody else.

C somebody else for Edmunds.

D the fingerprints of somebody else for Edmunds.

Lines 44- 45: “There are … Elizabeth’s.” From these lines we may draw two of the following conclusions.

1. The kidnapper had seen Elizabeth standing by the window.

2. The kidnapper must have known where Elizabeth slept.

3. The Smarts’ home had been surrounded by iron walls.

4. The Smarts’ home must have been protected against intruders. They are: A 1 + 2 B 1 + 3 C 2 + 4 D 3 + 4 29

Line 48: “… the break-in may have been staged.” These words suggest that the break-in was

A fake. B on stage. C on TV.

D real.

30

Lines 48-49: “But police … no evidence of that.”

“that” in line 49 refers to

A cutting the screen from the outside. B staging the break-in.

C the place where the kidnapper entered. D the report of the Salt Lake Tribune.

31

Lines 49-51: “In spite… NEWSWEEK.” From these lines we conclude that investigators A found it ridiculous that the kidnapper got into the Smart’s home.

B were quite confident about how the kidnapper got into the Smart’s home.

C were somewhat confident about how the kidnapper got into the Smart’s home.

D wondered how the kidnapper could have got into the Smart’s home.

32

Line 52: “… the crime scene was disturbed … “ These words indicate that

A the kidnapper had hardly left any traces. B the kidnapper made sure not to leave any traces.

C traces left behind by the kidnapper were intact.

D traces left behind by the kidnapper were not intact.

33

Lines 52-56: “It didn’t help … behind.” From these lines, we may draw the following conclusion about Elizabeth’s parents.

A They later disapproved of the way their friends had acted when searching for their daughter.

B They later regretted that they had called in their friends to search for their daughter. C They took a wrong decision on discovering the disappearance of their daughter.

D They used to call in friends when there was something wrong with their daughter.

34

Lines 57-59: “In the still-unsolved … hours.” These lines tell us that in the still-unsolved JonBenet Ramsey case police were blamed for A handling the case in a careless way.

B handling the case in a lax way.

C not having carefully examined the crime scene in the early morning .

D not having carefully examined the crime scene just after the crime.

35

Lines 60-61: “In Elizabeth Smarts’ … at all.” The sad reality is that investigators

A could not handle the case at all.

B could not investigate the case properly. C have not been given much help at all. D have not given much help at all.