Murder Sufficiency Defeats Manslaughter
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
14656_fellowship_flag_football · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice AGrant the motion for acquittal, because John would have survived had he gone to the hospital.
Why it's attractive
The medical evidence says John would have survived with treatment.
Why it's wrong
Uses the true survival-with-treatment fact but omits the causation rule.
Spot it next time
Ask whether the later refusal is enough to erase the stabbing as a legal cause.
14656_fellowship_flag_football · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice CDeny both motions, because insulting words alone do not constitute adequate provocation.
Why it's attractive
Students remember that insulting words alone usually are not enough.
Why it's wrong
Answers a words-only fact pattern while this stem includes a slap.
Spot it next time
Circle the slap and reject words-only framing.
14656_fellowship_flag_football · CRIMINAL_LAW · Choice DDeny both motions, because malice may be proved by the intentional use of a deadly weapon on a vital part of the body.
Why it's attractive
Knife-to-stomach malice sounds like a complete murder answer.
Why it's wrong
Answers murder sufficiency but not the separate manslaughter-instruction request.
Spot it next time
Ask whether the answer also defeats the manslaughter-instruction request.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →