Transactional Immunity Required
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 2 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
- CRIMINAL2
Example wrong choices
14586_advent_ledger · CRIMINAL · Choice AIt may not compel production of a personal devotional ledger under any circumstances.
Why it's attractive
The phrase 'under any circumstances' is an endpoint in an immunity ladder.
Why it's wrong
The phrase 'under any circumstances' is an endpoint in an immunity ladder.
14586_advent_ledger · CRIMINAL · Choice BIt may compel production without granting immunity, because Stephen was not compelled to create the ledger.
Why it's attractive
The choice answers whether Stephen was compelled to create the ledger, not whether producing it is testimonial.
Why it's wrong
The choice answers whether Stephen was compelled to create the ledger, not whether producing it is testimonial.
14586_advent_ledger · CRIMINAL · Choice DIt may compel production only if Stephen is granted transactional immunity.
Why it's attractive
The word 'only' demands broader protection than the privilege requires.
Why it's wrong
The word 'only' demands broader protection than the privilege requires.
19356_counterfeit_immunity · CRIMINAL · Choice BNo, because the Fifth Amendment requires transactional immunity — immunity from prosecution for the underlying counterfeiting — before a witness may be compelled to testify.
Why it's attractive
Invents a constitutional requirement; refuted only by the Kastigar Gold Key
Why it's wrong
Invents a constitutional requirement; refuted only by the Kastigar Gold Key
19356_counterfeit_immunity · CRIMINAL · Choice CYes, because once a court grants immunity and orders her to testify, a witness loses all Fifth Amendment protection and may be prosecuted based on her own testimony.
Why it's attractive
'grants immunity' yet 'prosecuted based on her testimony' fight each other — visible contradiction
Why it's wrong
'grants immunity' yet 'prosecuted based on her testimony' fight each other — visible contradiction
19356_counterfeit_immunity · CRIMINAL · Choice DNo, because prosecutors could still use independently gathered evidence to charge Esther with the counterfeiting, so her privilege is not fully protected.
Why it's attractive
True premise (independent evidence usable) missing the element that coextensiveness, not maximum protection, is the standard
Why it's wrong
True premise (independent evidence usable) missing the element that coextensiveness, not maximum protection, is the standard
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →