<P> A loaded question or complex question fallacy is a question that contains a controversial or unjustified assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt). </P> <P> Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda . The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Whether the respondent answers yes or no, he will admit to having a wife and having beaten her at some time in the past . Thus, these facts are presupposed by the question, and in this case an entrapment, because it narrows the respondent to a single answer, and the fallacy of many questions has been committed . The fallacy relies upon context for its effect: the fact that a question presupposes something does not in itself make the question fallacious . Only when some of these presuppositions are not necessarily agreed to by the person who is asked the question does the argument containing them become fallacious . Hence the same question may be loaded in one context, but not in the other . For example, the previous question would not be loaded if it were asked during a trial in which the defendant had already admitted to beating his wife . </P> <P> This fallacy should be distinguished from that of begging the question (not to be confused with raising the question), which offers a premise whose plausibility depends on the truth of the proposition asked about, and which is often an implicit restatement of the proposition . </P>

When did you stop beating your wife is an example of which logical fallacy