Kidnapped "Special Delivery" S01E02 OAD: 9-27-2006 *spoilers*

[terpfan1980]

The good news is... ouch. Luckily the good news was that it wasn't their daughter's ear, but too bad for the roomie.

I'm of the opinion that the young FBI guy (that shot the bad guy) is in on the plan and working against the FBI from within.

Intense show, but moving along nicely.

[terpfan1980]

Wow, much less discussion this week. I'm guessing it's a sign of people falling further and further behind in their TV watching with the new season in full swing now.

I have the same problem with a backlog of Smith, The Unit, and a few other shows to get through soon...

[jwjody]

I'm enjoying this kidnapped show much more than Vanished. I hope it sticks around.

J

[Rob Helmerichs]

I'm of the opinion that the young FBI guy (that shot the bad guy) is in on the plan and working against the FBI from within.
I got that vibe, too...

[drew2k]

I'm enjoying this much more than Vanished ... it's very entertaining and the hour flies by, where Vanished seems to move at a snail's pace.

Good idea on the rookie, but I'm thinking the rookie is just a rookie ... one that we'll grow to like because he's like a younger Knapp, but the rookie will turn out to be a red-shirt and will be killed by the end of the season.

[Zevida]

I'm enjoying this much more than Vanished ... it's very entertaining and the hour flies by, where Vanished seems to move at a snail's pace.


That's funny you say that. I experience the opposite, but in a good way! They seem to pack so much into the show that I'm suprised when we've only gone 30 minutes and half the show is still left. I don't think it's moving slow, it just seems longer.

I do think I'll end up liking it better than Vanished, if only because the show just looks so much better. Vanished's production looks more juvenile and hokey. Kidnapped's is more realistic and gritty. It's just more interesting to watch.

[newsposter]

i'm surprised they let the rogue guy get away with abusing the on duty agents so much. And walking along the tracks like that? ummm...one wrong step. And also i thought there was pretty much zero clearance and not room for anyone to stand in those tunnels when i train went by? Isnt that why in the movies they always try to outrun the trains?

Is it true that if someone is kidnapped you can decline fbi help?

[Rob Helmerichs]

Is it true that if someone is kidnapped you can decline fbi help?
I'm pretty sure that if they know a crime has been committed and you "decline their help" in investigating it, that would be a federal crime...

[Sirius Black]

I watched my recording of this last night. I was surprised at how good it really was. I definitely think it is better than Vanished. Vanished has all these stereotypical contrivances and Kidnapped seems to be going in a slightly more realisiic direction.

As for refusing FBI help, what about situations where the kidnapper specifically states that calling the FBI will result in the death of the person in question. I'm thinking of situations like that movie with Meg Ryan and Russell Crowe from a few years ago. Would Meg Ryan's character have been charged with a crime if she preferred the mercenary-ish Russell Crowe to handle things? I can see obstruction charges but that's about it.

[Rob Helmerichs]

As for refusing FBI help, what about situations where the kidnapper specifically states that calling the FBI will result in the death of the person in question. I'm thinking of situations like that movie with Meg Ryan and Russell Crowe from a few years ago. Would Meg Ryan's character have been charged with a crime if she preferred the mercenary-ish Russell Crowe to handle things? I can see obstruction charges but that's about it.
Obstruction is a crime. That's what sent Martha Stewert to prison.

I'm not sure the FI can stop Meg from working with Ryan, but Meg and Ryan certainly can't interfere with the FBI.

[Martha]

I love this show! I couldn't believe how much happened in this episode!

So they've killed the one guy that could have led them to the kidnappers - what now?

[Magnolia88]

Obstruction is a crime. That's what sent Martha Stewert to prison.

Martha Stewart was convicted of lying to federal agents. Refusing to cooperate is sort of different. You can't get in the way of an FBI investigation but neither are you required to go out of your way to assist them. (Well that would be true for any law enforcement agents, not just FBI).

That was sort of the basis of the dispute between the Ramsey family and the Boulder police. The Ramsey family believed they were cooperating, but the police saw them as refusing to cooperate because the Ramseys wouldn't do everything the police wanted them to do, and vice versa. The Ramseys decided they didn't want to assist the police when they realized the police cared only about getting evidence on them. But refusing to cooperate isn't obstructing, unless you deliberately lie or do something to interfere.

(I haven't seen this episode yet, it's waiting on my TiVo, so I have no idea if the Cains are actually doing something that would qualify as obstruction. But they don't have to cooperate if they don't want to.)

[7thton]

Love this show! Reminds me of some British suspence shows I have watched in the past....fast pace and a lot of details packed in to an hour.

[Delta13]

Interesting that the father went to his old stomping grounds of Sunnyvale before the FBI and Knapp figured it out ... hmm. He suspects something, maybe.

The young FBI agent makes perfect sense to be a guy on the inside - and yet, you think, maybe it's a bit too obvious. Ball Bouncing Man said there was going to be a plan, and none of his subordinates have fared too well under "alternate plans".

So far, the Cains have done nothing but cooperate. But I think there is a misunderstanding here - the Cains were actually under no obligation to report that a possible crime may have occurred. Cooperation after the FBI has had a crime reported to them is whole 'nother story.

You do not have to report if someone beats you up, for instance.

But back on point - I like the show. I hope it makes it through the fall.

[Rob Helmerichs]

So far, the Cains have done nothing but cooperate. But I think there is a misunderstanding here - the Cains were actually under no obligation to report that a possible crime may have occurred. Cooperation after the FBI has had a crime reported to them is whole 'nother story.
Since they are not the victim, I wonder if it's true that they are under no legal obligation to report the crime?

[drew2k]

Ball Bouncing Man said there was going to be a plan, and none of his subordinates have fared too well under "alternate plans".X-Files had it's cigarette-smoking-man, Kidnapped has "Textile Man". At least, that's what I've been calling the guy you describe as "Ball Bouncing Man". :)

I got "Textile" from the arched window behind him. I forgot the company name, but "Textiles" is printed on the glass below the company name.

[Delta13]

Then "Textile Man" it shall be!

[Delta13]

No, there is no obligation to report a crime. The major exception to that rule is child abuse. Even if you report a crime, you are under no law or statute to actually have charges filed - people decline pressing charges all the time. Why would we allow that if reporting a crime was mandatory?

It's much more a morality question than a legal one, and so far on Kidnapped a meaningless one. They wound up reporting it, in a way, and they are cooperating.

[Rob Helmerichs]

No, there is no obligation to report a crime. The major exception to that rule is child abuse. Even if you report a crime, you are under no law or statute to actually have charges filed - people decline pressing charges all the time. Why would we allow that if reporting a crime was mandatory?
That argument makes no sense. A kidnapping is, in fact, exactly analogous to child abuse--you have a victim of an ongoing crime who is suffering and who is powerless to report the crime himself. (And the State presses charges all the time without the cooperation of the victim.)

Does anybody out there actually know the law concerning this kind of matter?

[DevdogAZ]

I loved the "twist" at the very end where we learned that Knapp was the rookie agent who shot the tweaker and saved Delroy Lindo's life.

Interesing that the sister tries to hold her breath underwater too. Good money says that's going to come into play at some point during the season.

[jradford]

Interesting that the father went to his old stomping grounds of Sunnyvale before the FBI and Knapp figured it out ... hmm. He suspects something, maybe.
I think the father not only "suspects something," but actually "knows something." This will be a case where the father is a lot dirtier than he appears.

Loved that the kids escape let us know that he's in Mexico. Good line by his captor/guard: "you might be safer with me," or somethign like that.

Some cliches throughout the 1st two episodes, but not overly in your face. I'm liking it.

[Ruth]

Even if you report a crime, you are under no law or statute to actually have charges filed - people decline pressing charges all the time. Why would we allow that if reporting a crime was mandatory?


It is for some reason widely believed that victims can choose or not choose to "press charges." That is in no way true. The prosecutor's office has sole discretion in deciding what matters to bring before the grand jury seeking an indictment. It does not matter what the victims want or do not want to do. The prosecutors are supposed to consider the law, not popular opinion.

The prosecutor's office often does consider what the victim wants, especially with minor offenses -- both because the squeaky wheel gets the grease and because it's much easier to secure a conviction when the trial witnesses are cooperating with you. But prosecutors can and will refuse to seek indictments even when people are calling for it, and they can and do seek indictments even against victims' wishes.

[MikeSh]

The daughter sure did a lousy job of getting away from the bad guy. I liked his line to her about sticking her nose into other peoples stuff. he has no room to talk.

MikeS.

[Delta13]

It is for some reason widely believed that victims can choose or not choose to "press charges." That is in no way true. Sorry to be blunt Ruth, but the reason it is widely accepted to be true is because it's actually true.

Many college campuses tell female sexual assault victims that reporting it to the police does not mean prosecution is automatic. There's lots of examples, just go ahead and Google the phrase "victim retains the right to not pursue prosecution." Princeton, U. of South Carolina, Columbia University, Boise State, and literally hundreds more all say the victim decides whether prosecution occurs or not. Even if reported to and/or a formal complaint is filed with the police.

Princeton University Security Guide (http://web.princeton.edu/sites/publicsafety/CSR2005.pdf)

Even the DOJ recommends that the victim of a campus hate crime be allowed to choose between pressing charges or pursuing other options.

US DoJ CRS (http://www.usdoj.gov/crs/pubs/university92003.htm)

So, it is apparently true. Not a 100% true to be sure, but somewhat higher than 0%. ;)

[DevdogAZ]

Sorry to be blunt Ruth, but the reason it is widely accepted to be true is because it's actually true.

Many college campuses tell female sexual assault victims that reporting it to the police does not mean prosecution is automatic. There's lots of examples, just go ahead and Google the phrase "victim retains the right to not pursue prosecution." Princeton, U. of South Carolina, Columbia University, Boise State, and literally hundreds more all say the victim decides whether prosecution occurs or not. Even if reported to and/or a formal complaint is filed with the police.

Princeton University Security Guide (http://web.princeton.edu/sites/publicsafety/CSR2005.pdf)

Even the DOJ recommends that the victim of a campus hate crime be allowed to choose between pressing charges or pursuing other options.

US DoJ CRS (http://www.usdoj.gov/crs/pubs/university92003.htm)

So, it is apparently true. Not a 100% true to be sure, but somewhat higher than 0%. ;)
I think it depends on the type of crime. Rape is something that can't be proven without victim participation, and it's a very sensitive subject because often the victim feels like she's at fault and doesn't want it to become public or to have to face the rapist, or go through the public humiliation, etc. This is why law enforcement usually defers to the victims wishes in these types of cases.

However, things like kidnapping are not going to be overlooked by law enforcement simply because the victim doesn't want them to pursue it. That is a crime that can be proven without victim cooperation and it usually involves more than just one person (family, etc.).

[bruinfan]

no victim, no crime, right? if the victim won't testify to being raped, there is no victim, no case. all the person has to say is it was consensual.

i would even say if the kidnapping victim refused to cooperate for some reason, they can just say they went willingly, no victim, no crime.
even if the d.a. decided to pursue without victim cooperation, that's a ton of reasonable doubt if the victim doesn't testify... no case.

[Ruth]

I wasn't talking about campus police. I was talking about district attorneys' offices. The links you posted are all about college campuses. So is everything on the first couple of google pages on the search you suggested. I don't know much about the law that applies on residential college campuses. That may be a specialized situation.

I do know something about criminal law at the state level. If you google and read some victims' rights sites (not on campuses) you'll find that they do not promise that the victim can control the decision to prosecute. An example I am most familiar with is Alaska law. We have some strong victims' rights provisions in our Constitution. Here is a link to the Office of Victims Rights' description of a crime victims rights: http://www.officeofvictimsrights.legis.state.ak.us/aboutovr.htm#5 You will see that #2 is "[t]he right to confer with the prosecution." Confer, not dictate. Once it gets to that level they are running the show.

However, it is true (and I said this before) that typically DAs do take victim preference into account when they can. All I am saying is that they don't have to. Prosecutorial discretion is important to the functioning of the criminal justice system.

It does happen that you have trials (especially DV) where the victim is uncooperative by the time of trial. The DA can subpoena the victim. When they recant, they can be impeached with prior inconsistent statements, such as written statements to police, 911 calls, and statements to medical providers after the crime. There might be medical records, witnesses, other evidence. It is certainly possible to get a conviction that way.

[Rob Helmerichs]

Bear in mind that in this case, we're not talking about whether or not charges will be pressed. We are talking about the investigation of an ongoing crime.

[Ruth]

Yeah, we kind of got off track. Sorry! :)