Modern Statute Vs Strict Common Law
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
17375_fishing-charter-asportation · CRIMINAL · Choice AKidnapping, because Peter used force (drugging) to establish control over Mary
Why it's attractive
Proves force was used — but force is the wrong element; the missing element for kidnapping is asportation (movement), not intent or force.
Why it's wrong
Proves force was used — but force is the wrong element; the missing element for kidnapping is asportation (movement), not intent or force.
17375_fishing-charter-asportation · CRIMINAL · Choice CNo crime was committed, because Mary boarded the vessel and entered the cabin voluntarily
Why it's attractive
Stem shows Peter deliberately locking the hatch 'so Mary cannot leave' — visible evidence of intentional confinement that contradicts 'no crime' without needing any doctrine.
Why it's wrong
Stem shows Peter deliberately locking the hatch 'so Mary cannot leave' — visible evidence of intentional confinement that contradicts 'no crime' without needing any doctrine.
17375_fishing-charter-asportation · CRIMINAL · Choice DKidnapping, because Peter secretly confined Mary against her will in an enclosed space that was inaccessible to others
Why it's attractive
True under some modern statutes, but the stem anchors you to strict common-law doctrine, which requires asportation. Secret confinement without movement fails common-law kidnapping.
Why it's wrong
True under some modern statutes, but the stem anchors you to strict common-law doctrine, which requires asportation. Secret confinement without movement fails common-law kidnapping.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →