gitana1
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- May 31, 2005
- Messages
- 29,370
- Reaction score
- 229,836
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
What's horrible about the statute? I'm not a fan of rape. Or abduction.
I am curious, if this charge could be based on something a witness at tempo saw or overheard, or was told by the suspect after seeing him leave with an obviously inebriated HG.
Call me overly cautious, but I don't think they have anything more than this at the moment. If there was DNA, I would expect some acknowledgement of that. Not of course to the point where they reveal what DNA evidence they have or where it was located, naturally. I just find this odd.
That said. I don't doubt for a second that LE is sure this is their perp, or that these tactics will not only bring him in but also lead to finding HG. We'll just have to wait and see.
Those of us who obsess over these case and have for years know that it is not unusual for LE to refuse to give out specific evidence in advance of trial, before an arrest even.
Forgot to say...I am new..from TN and ANOTHER atty. thanks everyone for all the input these past few days. For whatever reason it has been a catharsis...
Welcome!!!!!! Stick around if you can.
Vulnerable, alone, pretty, young girl running with no buddies at 1am.............spells target. JMO
Not for sex trafficking. Not unless she was a runaway.
Could he be charged with abduction just by walking with her if a witness says she was in distress?
No.
Not one of the links you provided include the sex trafficking of middle class white adult women. It's all street kids and immigrants.
Hannah does not fit the profile of a person who has been trafficked into sex slavery or whatever.