Prior Statement Means Impeachment Only
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
- Evidence1
Example wrong choices
22219_baptism_dock_bottleneck · EVIDENCE · Choice ANo, because the statement is inadmissible hearsay.
Why it's attractive
This treats every out-of-court statement as blocked and ignores the opposing-party lane.
Why it's wrong
This treats every out-of-court statement as blocked and ignores the opposing-party lane.
22219_baptism_dock_bottleneck · EVIDENCE · Choice BYes, because the statement qualifies as a public record.
Why it's attractive
The answer shifts from Lydia's statement to the deputy's status and answers the wrong evidentiary question.
Why it's wrong
The answer shifts from Lydia's statement to the deputy's status and answers the wrong evidentiary question.
22219_baptism_dock_bottleneck · EVIDENCE · Choice DNo, because the statement is not being used for impeachment.
Why it's attractive
The answer assumes the statement matters only if used to attack credibility.
Why it's wrong
The answer assumes the statement matters only if used to attack credibility.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →