MovieChat Forums > Shop Talk Writers > What would this character do in my plot ...

What would this character do in my plot do you think?

posted 8 years ago by RynoII
7 replies | jump to latest

In my script, a gang is recruiting a new member and they give him a 'blood in'. It's a police term for when a new potential recruit, has to spill the blood of another person to prove their worth to the gang. However, the gang is cautious and they want to make sure that they are not recruiting a new member who will turn out to be an undercover cop, or someone who cannot be trusted, or something like that.

So what they do with the new member, is that they have him shoot a tied up hostage, who has a hood over her head so she cannot identify anyone's faces. They are also all wearing gloves the entire time careful not to get any prints on the scene. However, the hostage is working with the gang and is just posing as a hostage. The gun that that the new recruit will be given is a fake prop gun, so no real weapon is used.

However, a cop who is on patrol in an unmarked car, spotted something suspicious about the gang members, while they were on the way to the blood in, and discretely followed them. He sees that a kidnap victim may be killed so he busts in and rescues her. He manages to arrest one of them in the process and the rest get away with the gun, as he is busy saving the victim, and handcuffing the one.

Now basically the woman has to tell tell a lie or an excuse to the police to get the suspect off. Perhaps she could say that there was no kidnapping and that the cop was mistaken. But she also cannot name other members who ran away in masks. The other members are guilty of past crimes, and even though there is no victim to say they committed a crime here, they still dot not want to be on the police's radar. So the gang orders her to not name them but to also tell the police something to get the one suspect off.

But what would that lie or excuse be? Or, should she just remain silent and not say anything, hoping that without her testimony as victim to corroborate what the police say, will get the defendant off, cause without her confirming herself as a victim, there will not be enough evidence against the defendant therefore?

What do you think?

[–] RynoII 8 years ago

That's what I thought. But would the prosecution have enough to go forward, if they just use the police's testimony? If the cop said he saw her kidnapped, as well as the back up arriving officers, confirming that she was there, when they came, is that enough evidence to go forward that they do not need her testimony?

Would she have to tell lies then, if the cops' testimony is enough, and she would therefore have to counter it?

[–] Bioparadoxous 8 years ago

They're not going to pursue a case with only one uncooperative witness.

And seriously? You can't think up a lie for that scenario? How did you come up with any of this?

--
There's no such thing as the establishment. Everyone knows that!

[–] RynoII 8 years ago

Well I was told by readers that the lie I came up with sounds nonsensical. Basically she would have to tell the police that she met strangers while intoxicated, and invited them back to her place, for some twisted roleplaying. They took off when the police bust in, and she does know there real names. Accept for the one who is captured, which she will have to separate from the others and say she met him somewhere else, to make him appear more innocent from the others, and not associated with them.

But I was told this lie would not hold up in court. But if that is true, then what will, since she cannot name their identities?

However, is remaining silent better than lying, especially if the lie is too flimsy?

[–] Bioparadoxous 8 years ago

Because police can be assholes she and the other crook would probably be charged with some silly misdemeanor regardless. They love to slap people with resisting arrest charges, even when they have no cause for arrest "otherwise" (as if it's not your right to resist false imprisonment). - Obviously in this case it's almost justified (although not really.) This would be worth keeping in mind, it's such a nuisance that it seems unlikely the police would let them both slide without a little harassment first. I don't know who you were talking to, but - to the best of my knowledge - they can't charge either of them with the crime the cop thinks he interrupted either way.

It's like a technicality, the lie only exists to have something to tell the cops, it doesn't need to hold up in court, because it wouldn't go to court. They can all accept that it's a lie, and it can still be "the truth" as far as anyone cares.

Even more amusingly, they probably can't charge anyone with a serious crime if she tells them the truth. It's not exactly against the law to pretend to be murdered, or to pretend to kill someone. Certainly can't be a serious crime. - Sure, depending on how far it had gone, if he was the one who was arrested, and the particular State they live in, the recruit being initiated could be charged with attempted murder. There's no doubt there. And it's possible in Illinois (specifically, but that's the only one I know of) the same guy could be charged with conspiracy to commit murder, although I'm fuzzy on whether the others can be charged alongside him. Since they had no intention of carrying it out.

So anyway, yeah, as long as it's not Chicago, and as long as the recruit isn't the arrested party, even with these crooks telling the truth, it would yield little reward for the officer's heroism and bravery. The most I could imagine is an obstruction of justice charge for the those two, for not identifying their friends, disturbing the peace and... I don't know - reckless endangerment. As a short list. Maybe look into how serious those crimes are, I don't feel like looking it up. But it might be a funny way to solve your problem, since it's not possible for everyone involved to walk away without at least a slap on the wrist, kosher or otherwise... maybe honesty is their best policy.

--
There's no such thing as the establishment. Everyone knows that!

[–] thebigmouth 8 years ago

Well I was told by readers that the lie I came up with sounds nonsensical.
Readers of what?

TV: http://ihatemydvr.blogspot.com
LOST:http://eyemsick.blogspot.com

[–] RynoII 8 years ago

Readers of the outline, and the parts of the script I wrote so far.

I was told by two lawyers when researching it, they would be charged for conspiracy. But I think this might largely depend on how the victim acts. If the victim says it was a roleplaying, then it's not murder. So it would be conspiracy to rollplaying, then wouldn't it?

I was told that since the one suspect surrendered without resisting, and the woman was tied up at the time, that they cannot be charged with the reckless endangerment that the others caused in their escape, since their escape happened after the police arrested the one suspect and rescued the woman.

However, I would like the case to to go court though. But people lawyers are split on the situation, when I ask them what would happen. Some say, that the case would go to court and the prosecutor would use the cops' only as witnesses, and forget about the woman, since her testimony is not reliable, and some say that her testimony is needed, because without a victim, they have nothing.

So I don't know which it is, when I am getting two very opposite legal opinions on the matter.

[–] RynoII 8 years ago

I have written about one third to half, and I have all the scenes in the outline described, one after the other, which are subject to change, when it comes to improving it.