Why did the judges ask her the question if they didn’t want an answer?
>Why did the judges ask her the question if they didn’t want an answer?
For the same reason the founders decided to include the fifth amendment in the bill of rights: they saw it IS definitely possible to be asked a question that can be used to condemn you however you answer it.
For example, when Jesus was asked “is it lawful to pay taxes [to Caesar]?” They were laying a trap for him; if he said that it was then the nationalists would be angry at him for accepting/encouraging/endorsing Roman rule, whereas if he had said that it was not he would surely have been hauled before the Roman authorities under the charge of sedition.
The answer he DID give, however, was masterful and wise: “Render unto God what is God’s and unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.”
(Note, he didn’t say that you were supposed to get screwed-over; as corruption was a common thing among tax-collectors.)