Which of the following would be a valid impossibility defense?
A) Which of the following would be a valid impossibility defense?
B) The victim does not show up at the ambush point.
C) What the defendant plans to do to the victim is not a criminal act.
D) The poison is not strong enough to kill the victim.

Question

Which of the following would be a valid impossibility defense?​
A) ​Which of the following would be a valid impossibility defense?
B) ​The victim does not show up at the ambush point.
C) ​What the defendant plans to do to the victim is not a criminal act.
D) ​The poison is not strong enough to kill the victim.

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The defense of impossibility refers to a situation where a defendant cannot commit the crime they are accused of because it is not possible to do so. In option A, there is no defense given, but rather a question. Option B does not qualify as the victim simply not showing up does not constitute legal impossibility. Option D is not a valid impossibility defense because the defendant still intended to kill the victim, and the fact that the poison was not strong enough does not negate the criminal intent. However, in option C, if what the defendant planned to do to the victim is not considered a crime, then no crime can be said to have been committed, and the impossibility defense can be used in such a situation.

Which of the Following Would Be a Valid Impossibility Defense?​

Which of the Following Would Be a Valid Impossibility Defense?