This particular statute appends a specific mental state to the above definition, that of the abductor doing the abduction with the intent to defile (commit rape, carnal knowledge, sodomy, object sexual penetration) or to place a child under 16 into prostitution.
The act of the abduction isnt necessarily actually transporting the victim, and it would seem that the abductor could simply deprive that person [the victim] of liberty in the exact same spot where they met. The abductor can even transport the purported victim to an isolated location without any apparent protest from the victim. The prosecution must then prove the abductors mental state, i.e. the abductor took the victim to the other place for the purpose of being able to commit his sex crime without fear of being caught.
A specific example of abduction with the intent to defile: The abductor observes somebody at a convenience store in the process of shoplifting. The abductor approaches the victim and pretends to be store security, then transports the victim to an isolated location and commits a rape.
Abuction with Intent to Defile is a Class 2 Felony, punishable 20 years to life in prison and/or a fines of up to $100,000. This punishment would be in addition to the jurys recommended punishment for the underlying sex offense, i.e. rape, carnal knowledge, sodomy, object sexual penetration). This offense can pertain to victims who are either an adult or a juvenile
The most horrible thing about this statute is that it can tack 20 years of minimum-mandatory prison onto what may have been a relatively-low jury sentence for the sex offense. For example, I once had a jury for a rape in one jurisdiction which found my client guilty and gave him 5 years of prison time, the absolute minimum sentence. Then, the second jury in the jurisdiction from which the victim was abducted found him guilty of the abduction and had to give him the 20 years minimum mandatory.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
.
