Same Result Wrong Reason
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 8 active questions. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- Evidence4
- Contracts2
- CRIMINAL1
- Criminal Law1
Example wrong choices
first 2014485_calligraphy_parcel · CONTRACTS · Choice Bwin, because Ruth failed to seasonably notify Paul of the pending sale to Naomi.
Why it's attractive
The answer adds a seasonable-notice requirement not supplied by the Gold Key.
Why it's wrong
The answer adds a seasonable-notice requirement not supplied by the Gold Key.
14485_calligraphy_parcel · CONTRACTS · Choice Close, because Ruth's acceptance of Paul's purchase-price tender was a concurrent condition to Ruth's duty to convey the parcel on October 15.
Why it's attractive
The choice talks about ordinary closing exchange instead of the earlier retraction cutoff.
Why it's wrong
The choice talks about ordinary closing exchange instead of the earlier retraction cutoff.
14485_calligraphy_parcel · CONTRACTS · Choice Dwin, because Ruth waived Paul's March 4 repudiation by asking him on March 22 to reconsider and close as scheduled.
Why it's attractive
The answer converts Ruth's request to reconsider into waiver.
Why it's wrong
The answer converts Ruth's request to reconsider into waiver.
14541_marys_livestream_maintenance · CONTRACTS · Choice AEither Peter's Audio Shop or Lydia Signal Care, because each can enforce Mary's monthly payment promise, so mutuality of remedy makes each answerable for the defective work.
Why it's attractive
The because-clause invents mutuality of remedy as the liability source.
Why it's wrong
The because-clause invents mutuality of remedy as the liability source.
14541_marys_livestream_maintenance · CONTRACTS · Choice BLydia Signal Care only, because it is experienced and financially responsible enough to provide audiovisual service.
Why it's attractive
The choice treats competence as a release term.
Why it's wrong
The choice treats competence as a release term.
14541_marys_livestream_maintenance · CONTRACTS · Choice DPeter's Audio Shop only, because Lydia Signal Care made no promise directly to Mary.
Why it's attractive
No direct promise to Mary is true but incomplete.
Why it's wrong
No direct promise to Mary is true but incomplete.
14615_psalm_cart_informant · CRIMINAL · Choice ADenied, because Daniel had received Miranda warnings.
Why it's attractive
The choice points to a real adjacent lane, but the stem’s charge-plus-agent facts point to the counsel lane.
Why it's wrong
The choice points to a real adjacent lane, but the stem’s charge-plus-agent facts point to the counsel lane.
14615_psalm_cart_informant · CRIMINAL · Choice BDenied, because Barnabas did not ask Daniel any direct questions about the robbery.
Why it's attractive
The answer over-focuses on direct questions and misses the prosecutor-created setup.
Why it's wrong
The answer over-focuses on direct questions and misses the prosecutor-created setup.
14615_psalm_cart_informant · CRIMINAL · Choice DGranted, because Daniel’s privilege against self-incrimination was violated.
Why it's attractive
The result matches, but the because-clause does not answer the governing lane.
Why it's wrong
The result matches, but the because-clause does not answer the governing lane.
14804_nativity_badge_source · EVIDENCE · Choice Binadmissible, because Timothy was not confronted with the statement while on the stand.
Why it's attractive
It reaches inadmissibility but does not give the dispositive reason.
Why it's wrong
It reaches inadmissibility but does not give the dispositive reason.
14804_nativity_badge_source · EVIDENCE · Choice Cadmissible as a prior consistent statement by a witness.
Why it's attractive
The prior-consistent label is a real route, but the stem does not open it.
Why it's wrong
The prior-consistent label is a real route, but the stem does not open it.
14804_nativity_badge_source · EVIDENCE · Choice Dadmissible as an identification of Lydia by a witness after having perceived her.
Why it's attractive
The statement names Lydia, but the declarant-witness gate is missing.
Why it's wrong
The statement names Lydia, but the declarant-witness gate is missing.
14805_psalm_planner_notes · EVIDENCE · Choice AYes, because they are recorded recollections.
Why it's attractive
This sees notes made to remember but skips the missing foundation and exhibit limit.
Why it's wrong
This sees notes made to remember but skips the missing foundation and exhibit limit.
14805_psalm_planner_notes · EVIDENCE · Choice BYes, because they are business records.
Why it's attractive
This treats work-related personal notes as regularly made business records.
Why it's wrong
This treats work-related personal notes as regularly made business records.
14805_psalm_planner_notes · EVIDENCE · Choice DNo, because Lydia's immunity agreement makes the notes untrustworthy and therefore substantially more prejudicial than probative.
Why it's attractive
This says no but does not answer the hearsay-exception problem.
Why it's wrong
This says no but does not answer the hearsay-exception problem.
14880_bible_quiz_mint_tin · EVIDENCE · Choice Aoverruled, because the objection should have been framed as an incomplete chain-of-custody objection.
Why it's attractive
Same disposition as the correct answer, but the reason answers a different objection frame.
Why it's wrong
Same disposition as the correct answer, but the reason answers a different objection frame.
14880_bible_quiz_mint_tin · EVIDENCE · Choice Bsustained, unless the judge first finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the tin was the one Timothy tossed.
Why it's attractive
This choice raises the burden and moves the identity finding from the jury gate to the judge.
Why it's wrong
This choice raises the burden and moves the identity finding from the jury gate to the judge.
14880_bible_quiz_mint_tin · EVIDENCE · Choice Dsustained, because Timothy did not have possession of the tin when he was arrested.
Why it's attractive
The choice focuses on the arrest moment, but the identification link was formed before and after the chase.
Why it's wrong
The choice focuses on the arrest moment, but the identification link was formed before and after the chase.
14905_psalm_riser_still · EVIDENCE · Choice BNo, because Naomi has not produced the original video or a duplicate of it.
Why it's attractive
The missing video fact matters, but this answer treats it as automatic exclusion.
Why it's wrong
The missing video fact matters, but this answer treats it as automatic exclusion.
14905_psalm_riser_still · EVIDENCE · Choice CYes, because a photograph that proves a disputed fact cannot be excluded as unfairly prejudicial.
Why it's attractive
The absolute phrase "cannot be excluded" overclaims the effect of disputed relevance.
Why it's wrong
The absolute phrase "cannot be excluded" overclaims the effect of disputed relevance.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →