Aiding Abetting Equals Conspiracy
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
22292_sabotaged-vehicle · CRIMINAL · Choice ANo, because one of the young men effectively withdrew from any conspiracy that existed.
Why it's attractive
Withdrawal is a defense for co-conspirators. Daniel was never a co-conspirator. Timothy's withdrawal is irrelevant to whether Daniel agreed.
Why it's wrong
Withdrawal is a defense for co-conspirators. Daniel was never a co-conspirator. Timothy's withdrawal is irrelevant to whether Daniel agreed.
22292_sabotaged-vehicle · CRIMINAL · Choice BYes, because he knowingly aided and abetted in the commission of a crime.
Why it's attractive
The charge is conspiracy, not murder. Aiding and abetting makes you liable for the principal crime, not for conspiracy. Different doctrines.
Why it's wrong
The charge is conspiracy, not murder. Aiding and abetting makes you liable for the principal crime, not for conspiracy. Different doctrines.
22292_sabotaged-vehicle · CRIMINAL · Choice CYes, because he committed an overt act in furtherance of an agreement to cut the brake lines on James's truck.
Why it's attractive
The answer says 'in furtherance of an agreement.' But the facts show Daniel never agreed with anyone. He decided to help silently. No agreement = no conspiracy, overt act or not.
Why it's wrong
The answer says 'in furtherance of an agreement.' But the facts show Daniel never agreed with anyone. He decided to help silently. No agreement = no conspiracy, overt act or not.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →