GUILTY NH - AH, 14, North Conway, 9 October 2013 - #14

[SStarr33]

What is the big deal about the sketch not looking like the perp to people that didn't live through this? Have any of you ever had to sit in front of a sketch artist after trauma? Are all sketch artists equally qualified? The details will come out in time, but there is one thing that isn't going to change and that is the fact that she is 14/15 years old and he is 30 something. She is a minor child and he is a adult. He was very aware of her age and the fact that there was a search going on for 9 months. He did not turn her over to her family or law enforcement during this time period. Read the statute for the state. I doubt he had her there to bake cookies for him every day, so I am sure there will be more charges filed. Right now, all that matters is he is held behind bars and the prosecution is doing their best to protect her at by holding the details for as long as possible, while they continue to conduct the investigation.

Because the sketch looks like a different Kibby. Exactly like a different Kibby.

And nobody can figure out how AH knew him

 

[Fireweed]

Interestingly, the Casanova case addresses that issue (whether the intended offense is a lesser included offense of kidnapping). As you have suggested, since a kidnapper may fail to carry out his purpose, the intended offense is not considered a lesser included offense.

So under NH law, at this point, based solely on what Kibby is charged with, Kibby kidnapped Abby with the INTENT to commit an offense against her, and that offense was never actually committed.

 

[Fireweed]

One more thing" "knowingly confining someone under your control" could happen any number of ways, and may certainly be done without abducting someone.

If I go to a man's house, and he prevents me from leaving because he is trying to rape me, that would be kidnapping. And the whole thing could have lasted less than 5 minutes, and he would be charged with the exact same thing that Kibby has been charged with.

 

[Not Without Peril]

So under NH law, at this point, based solely on what Kibby is charged with, Kibby kidnapped Abby with the INTENT to commit an offense against her, and that offense was never actually committed.

I would qualify your statement slightly: "under NH law, at this point, based solely on what Kibby is charged with, Kibby kidnapped Abby with the INTENT to commit an offense against her" -- whether or not that offense was actually committed.

 

[Not Without Peril]

One more thing" "knowingly confining someone under your control" could happen any number of ways, and may certainly be done without abducting someone.

If I go to a man's house, and he prevents me from leaving because he is trying to rape me, that would be kidnapping. And the whole thing could have lasted less than 5 minutes, and he would be charged with the exact same thing that Kibby has been charged with.

I absolutely agree with this assessment.

 

[Fireweed]

I would qualify your statement slightly: "under NH law, at this point, based solely on what Kibby is charged with, Kibby kidnapped Abby with the INTENT to commit an offense against her" -- whether or not that offense was actually committed.

I should have been more clear. What I was trying to say is that it seems that if he did commit that offense, then he would have been charged with that offense at the same time he was charged with the actual kidnapping.

Like, Kibby kidnaps Abby with for purposes of rape. He does not actually rape her, and changes his mind and lets her go. That is a Class B felony kidnapping under NH law. They cannot charge him with rape, because no rape happened, but the purpose of confining her was for rape.

Now let's say that in another version, he does rape her, and he lets her go. That is class B felony kidnapping and rape, because as you say, the other offense is not included in the charge of kidnapping.

Heck, even the defense attorney was baffled by this at the arraignment. He kept saying that he needed to know what offense it was that the state claimed Kibby intended to commit.

 

[Not Without Peril]

So under NH law, at this point, based solely on what Kibby is charged with, Kibby kidnapped Abby with the INTENT to commit an offense against her, and that offense was never actually committed.

Here's my question: after nine months, if he never committed the alleged intended offense, how do you prove that he intended to commit it?

 

[Not Without Peril]

I should have been more clear. What I was trying to say is that it seems that if he did commit that offense, then he would have been charged with that offense at the same time he was charged with the actual kidnapping.

Yes; it certainly is strange, isn't it?

 

[BeginnersLuck]

Not necessarily. They charge him with enough to hold him. They build their case and if warranted, more charges with follow. You can always add more charges. The important thing is keeping him behind bars so he cannot cause further harm or flee.

 

[Not Without Peril]

I should have been more clear. What I was trying to say is that it seems that if he did commit that offense, then he would have been charged with that offense at the same time he was charged with the actual kidnapping.

Like, Kibby kidnaps Abby with for purposes of rape. He does not actually rape her, and changes his mind and lets her go. That is a Class B felony kidnapping under NH law. They cannot charge him with rape, because no rape happened, but the purpose of confining her was for rape.

Now let's say that in another version, he does rape her, and he lets her go. That is class B felony kidnapping and rape, because as you say, the other offense is not included in the charge of kidnapping.

Heck, even the defense attorney was baffled by this at the arraignment. He kept saying that he needed to know what offense it was that the state claimed Kibby intended to commit.

I'm baffled. I cannot imagine a set of circumstances that makes sense.

 

[Fireweed]

Here's my question: after nine months, if he never committed the alleged intended offense, how do you prove that he intended to commit it?

Excellent point. Though I do suppose that, under the law, if he had that intent at the moment he had Abby get into the car, then he could still be charged with the class b kidnapping felony even if he dropped that intent only a short time later.

My other issue is that surely any way of forcing someone into a car would be either an assault or a battery. If that is how he got her, then that should be part of the charges.

People keep saying that there are surely more charges to come, but to me, all these things would just be basics and totally corollary to the main kidnapping charge.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Yeah but why not? It makes no sense to me.

Ya need a cooperative victim. IMO

 

[Not Without Peril]

Excellent point. Though I do suppose that, under the law, if he had that intent at the moment he had Abby get into the car, then he could still be charged with the class b kidnapping felony even if he dropped that intent only a short time later.

My other issue is that surely any way of forcing someone into a car would be either an assault or a battery. If that is how he got her, then that should be part of the charges.

People keep saying that there are surely more charges to come, but to me, all these things would just be basics and totally corollary to the main kidnapping charge.

In addition to a battery, I would expect threats to have accompanied the abduction.

 

[Fireweed]

In addition to a battery, I would expect threats to have accompanied the abduction.

I guess I could see just an assault charge if he pointed a gun at her and had get in the car.

Seriously though, all this stuff should have been part of the original kidnapping charge.

 

[Not Without Peril]

I guess I could see just an assault charge if he pointed a gun at her and had get in the car.

True.

Seriously though, all this stuff should have been part of the original kidnapping charge.

I would be very interested to hear someone explain why it was not part of the original complaint.

 

[Fireweed]

True.



I would be very interested to hear someone explain why it was not part of the original complaint.

I cannot wrap my head around it. I could see later, after the search of the house, adding charges for having weed or an illegal gun, but stuff that has to do with the kidnapping should be in the kidnapping charge.

How can the defense attorney possibly defend his client if they are not done charging him for the kidnapping? What if Kibby pleaded guilty at his arraignment to the kidnapping charge, and then three weeks later they added a rape charge that happened in conjunction with that kidnapping? How can the defense get an idea as to what evidence in relevant, or what questions they need to ask their client?

It. Makes. No. Sense.

 

[ontheclock]

I'm still thrilled that Abigail made her way home!

 

[jojo87]

Probably reading to much into something that isn't there but the stamped addressed envelope in his pocket why would he be carrying that knowing he'd be photographed. Why not give it to his attorney to post or leave it in his cell. Could it be a sign or signal. Just a bit odd.

 

[bakerlady]

This is what I got from some research.

False Imprisonment - If Abby voluntarily went to NK's home to visit and he would not let her leave.

Kidnapping - Abby was taken to NK's hom by force and contained. The actual movement of her personage is what is needed for the kidnapping charge.

If charged with one of those crimes that negates the other. Either she was transported against her will and later confined or she transported herself voluntarily and then was confined. It can't be both.

 

[bakerlady]

I cannot wrap my head around it. I could see later, after the search of the house, adding charges for having weed or an illegal gun, but stuff that has to do with the kidnapping should be in the kidnapping charge.

How can the defense attorney possibly defend his client if they are not done charging him for the kidnapping? What if Kibby pleaded guilty at his arraignment to the kidnapping charge, and then three weeks later they added a rape charge that happened in conjunction with that kidnapping? How can the defense get an idea as to what evidence in relevant, or what questions they need to ask their client?

It. Makes. No. Sense.

Unless there is some type of video/photo evidence or a child in the womb or items disposed in the trash with DNA (sorry ew), then there really would be no way for the state to build a rape case. If they did file charges without evidence they would surely lose IMO. My guess is that there is no evidence.