Thank you debbiegarcia36 for your response.
Thanks to Whiteorchids and DD8 you are both correct I am only speculating.
I apologize for the wording of my original post it caused confusion among many WS posters.
All I wanted to do was illustrate Ayoola’s intent ‘especially’ when presented in their totality will justify the death penalty. The aggravated kidnapping charge just strengthens the prosecutions argument. The DA has their electronic communications and I am confident this will beyond any doubt prove all of AA’s practiced deception.
Aggravated kidnapping in this case includes ‘fraud’ which is defined as any type of deliberate or intentional misrepresentation for the defendant’s own benefit(i.e. a trick) here the victim did not know what she was agreeing to. Another example is MacKenzie had been promised one thing but AA fraudulently did another.Even if MacKenzie had agreed to voluntarily get in AA’s car and be moved, she could not have agreed to an offer or promise based on fraud (AA was a practiced deviant and hid all his malevolent phantasies).
I am not a lawyer so this is my interpretation as a lay person.
MOO
As a layperson, I think that the easiest way to show that the kidnapping was aggravated would be—that it resulted in her physical harm.