Corporate Employer Shields Officer
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
- Criminal Law1
Example wrong choices
14638_galilee_garments · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice ACorrect, because it is a violation of due process to punish a person without a voluntary act.
Why it's attractive
Voluntary-act due process sounds fundamental and familiar.
Why it's wrong
Focuses on personal voluntary act rather than the control/delegation fact that triggers responsible-officer liability.
Spot it next time
Circle CEO + delegated operations + strict liability; then recall responsible-control liability.
14638_galilee_garments · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice BCorrect, because criminal liability is personal and Galilee Garments, Inc., not Peter, is the employer of the minors.
Why it's attractive
Criminal liability is personal is a strong ordinary-criminal-law instinct.
Why it's wrong
Uses ordinary personal-liability language in the wrong public-welfare responsible-officer context.
Spot it next time
Ask whether the answer is using the wrong frame for the regulatory offense.
14638_galilee_garments · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice CIncorrect, because regulatory offenses are not subject to due process limitations.
Why it's attractive
The conclusion is right, so students may stop reading before checking the reason.
Why it's wrong
Correct conclusion, but the because-clause overclaims that regulatory offenses are not subject to due process limitations.
Spot it next time
Test both halves: conclusion and reason. Cut overbroad reasons.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →