Implied Malice Requires Specific Intent
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
14658_christian_publishing · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice Bguilty, based upon transferred intent.
Why it's attractive
It reaches the correct guilty result and uses a familiar homicide doctrine.
Why it's wrong
Correct guilty result, but wrong transferred-intent route.
Spot it next time
Ask whether transferred intent is the actual route when John fired the fatal shot.
14658_christian_publishing · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice Cnot guilty, because he did not intend for Timothy to be shot by John.
Why it's attractive
It sounds fair because Paul did not specifically want Timothy shot.
Why it's wrong
Lack of intent that Timothy be shot does not defeat implied-malice causation.
Spot it next time
Ask whether Paul created a foreseeable deadly risk.
14658_christian_publishing · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice Dnot guilty, because he did not shoot Timothy, and he was not acting in concert with John.
Why it's attractive
It uses the common myth that murder requires personal shooting or partnership with the shooter.
Why it's wrong
Shooter/accomplice status is not the required route.
Spot it next time
Separate shooter/accomplice liability from causation liability.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →