Accomplice Victim Misleads To Policy Exception
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 1 active question. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- CRIMINAL1
Example wrong choices
16044_barnabas_haul · CRIMINAL · Choice ABarnabas did not proximately cause Stephen's death through the commission of any of the crimes the statute enumerates.
Why it's attractive
Proximate cause is a real hurdle in homicide — the death here is indirect (sparks/fire) — but the real defense is simpler: no predicate felony existed.
Why it's wrong
Proximate cause is a real hurdle in homicide — the death here is indirect (sparks/fire) — but the real defense is simpler: no predicate felony existed.
16044_barnabas_haul · CRIMINAL · Choice CThe felony-murder statute was not intended to protect an accomplice who knowingly participates in a felony.
Why it's attractive
The statute lists four felonies but says nothing about who the victim is. If a bystander died, no one would argue the statute 'wasn't intended' for bystanders. The accomplice-as-victim fact alone does not create a carve-out.
Why it's wrong
The statute lists four felonies but says nothing about who the victim is. If a bystander died, no one would argue the statute 'wasn't intended' for bystanders. The accomplice-as-victim fact alone does not create a carve-out.
16044_barnabas_haul · CRIMINAL · Choice DStephen assumed the risk of death by voluntarily participating in the scheme.
Why it's attractive
Assumption of risk is a tort defense. Criminal law does not recognize it. The question is in Criminal Law, not Torts.
Why it's wrong
Assumption of risk is a tort defense. Criminal law does not recognize it. The question is in Criminal Law, not Torts.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →