Question regarding kidnapping and the statute of limitations in Mississippi.

[Matt]

Greeting all,
I am writing here to see if I can get some clarification on
Mississippi's statute of limitations regarding kidnapping. A friend of
mine was kidnapped by her husband in 2000 from MS and brought to LA.
She did not press charges at the time because he threatened to kill
her if she did at which time she told the police in LA that she was
not going to press charges because of his statement.
From searching the internet I have found that MS does not have a
statute of limitations for kidnapping and that prosecution can begin
years after it has taken place.
The problem my friend is facing now is that she is 60 years old and
disabled. She is currently in financial trouble and her husband is
threatening to kick her out onto the street with nothing. She does not
have anywhere to go and is afraid that if she stays he is going to get
violent and hurt her or possibly worse.
Is there any way that she could still have the charge brought up
against him? The FBI at the time wanted him bad and said that if
charges were pressed that he would likely not see the light of day
again. They quoted a sentence of 30-life.
Any information would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time,
Matt

[Gordon Burditt]

Post by Matt
I am writing here to see if I can get some clarification on
Mississippi's statute of limitations regarding kidnapping. A friend of
mine was kidnapped by her husband in 2000 from MS and brought to LA.
She did not press charges at the time because he threatened to kill
her if she did at which time she told the police in LA that she was
not going to press charges because of his statement.

So how long ago was that? 1 year? 20 years? 40 years?

Post by Matt
From searching the internet I have found that MS does not have a
statute of limitations for kidnapping and that prosecution can begin
years after it has taken place.

As a possible juror, I'd wonder why this wasn't brought up earlier.
After a long time, she's forgotten a lot of the details, and any
other witnesses may no longer be available or have forgotten details.

She was kidnapped from MS to LA, didn't press charges in LA, is
still staying with him in LA (for *how many* years?) ? She wants
to press charges because *he might throw her out* ?

Post by Matt
The problem my friend is facing now is that she is 60 years old and
disabled. She is currently in financial trouble and her husband is
threatening to kick her out onto the street with nothing. She does not
have anywhere to go and is afraid that if she stays he is going to get
violent and hurt her or possibly worse.

She should leave. Now. Doesn't LA have abused women's shelters?
It sounds like she's undergoing verbal if not physical abuse
(currently, not in the far past).

This kind of motive for bringing up the case now is *NOT* something
you'd want to put in front of a jury. It sounds too much like the
joke about the prostitute who presses charges for rape, but only
after she found out the check bounced. Please don't take that the
wrong way, but her behavior after the kidnapping certainly doesn't
sound like she was serious when she reported the kidnapping in the
first place. Maybe she was serious. She'll have a harder time
convincing a jury, though.

Post by Matt
Is there any way that she could still have the charge brought up
against him? The FBI at the time wanted him bad and said that if
charges were pressed that he would likely not see the light of day
again. They quoted a sentence of 30-life.

If they had much other evidence besides her testimony, they could have
proceeded without anyone "pressing charges".

After some years have passed, the FBI might not even want to bother
with the case now. Especially if she's the only witness. If they
can use statements and evidence from around the time of the alleged
kidnapping, they might have a better case.

As a juror, I might vote NOT GUILTY on the kidnapping and GUILTY
on (recent) spousal abuse.

What's she going to do if she gets him thrown in jail? Unless he
owns his place free and clear, the time will come when she gets
kicked out of it by the landlord or bank. He won't be earning much
in jail. It may be better that she leave NOW.

Post by Matt
Any information would be greatly appreciated.

[Matt]

Post by Gordon Burditt

Post by Matt
I am writing here to see if I can get some clarification on
Mississippi's statute of limitations regarding kidnapping. A friend of
mine was kidnapped by her husband in 2000 from MS and brought to LA.
She did not press charges at the time because he threatened to kill
her if she did at which time she told the police in LA that she was
not going to press charges because of his statement.

So how long ago was that? 1 year? 20 years? 40 years?

Post by Matt
From searching the internet I have found that MS does not have a
statute of limitations for kidnapping and that prosecution can begin
years after it has taken place.

As a possible juror, I'd wonder why this wasn't brought up earlier.
After a long time, she's forgotten a lot of the details, and any
other witnesses may no longer be available or have forgotten details.
She was kidnapped from MS to LA, didn't press charges in LA, is
still staying with him in LA (for *how many* years?) ? She wants
to press charges because *he might throw her out* ?

Post by Matt
The problem my friend is facing now is that she is 60 years old and
disabled. She is currently in financial trouble and her husband is
threatening to kick her out onto the street with nothing. She does not
have anywhere to go and is afraid that if she stays he is going to get
violent and hurt her or possibly worse.

She should leave. Now. Doesn't LA have abused women's shelters?
It sounds like she's undergoing verbal if not physical abuse
(currently, not in the far past).
This kind of motive for bringing up the case now is *NOT* something
you'd want to put in front of a jury. It sounds too much like the
joke about the prostitute who presses charges for rape, but only
after she found out the check bounced. Please don't take that the
wrong way, but her behavior after the kidnapping certainly doesn't
sound like she was serious when she reported the kidnapping in the
first place. Maybe she was serious. She'll have a harder time
convincing a jury, though.

Post by Matt
Is there any way that she could still have the charge brought up
against him? The FBI at the time wanted him bad and said that if
charges were pressed that he would likely not see the light of day
again. They quoted a sentence of 30-life.

If they had much other evidence besides her testimony, they could have
proceeded without anyone "pressing charges".
After some years have passed, the FBI might not even want to bother
with the case now. Especially if she's the only witness. If they
can use statements and evidence from around the time of the alleged
kidnapping, they might have a better case.
As a juror, I might vote NOT GUILTY on the kidnapping and GUILTY
on (recent) spousal abuse.
What's she going to do if she gets him thrown in jail? Unless he
owns his place free and clear, the time will come when she gets
kicked out of it by the landlord or bank. He won't be earning much
in jail. It may be better that she leave NOW.

Post by Matt
Any information would be greatly appreciated.

I totally agree with you. There are witnesses and they still remember
everything that happened. The FBI has photos of all her injuries she
sustained as well as all of the hospital records.
For some reason at the time they could not go along with the
prosecution alone without her (which I believe is different now). LA
law has changed as well since then.
I have sent a message to the FBI to see if I can get some
clarification as well. I believe she just wanted to know the legal
ramifications and what is possible.
I don't think she has ever truly ever gotten over everything and has
stayed with this man out of fear.
Money is not her motive here. Her financial troubles are only a
temporary issue at the moment. Besides that, LA is a community
property state and she would only what what she is entitled to.

[Gordon Burditt]

Post by Matt

Post by Gordon Burditt
What's she going to do if she gets him thrown in jail? Unless he
owns his place free and clear, the time will come when she gets
kicked out of it by the landlord or bank. He won't be earning much
in jail. It may be better that she leave NOW.

Post by Matt
Any information would be greatly appreciated.

I totally agree with you. There are witnesses and they still remember
everything that happened. The FBI has photos of all her injuries she
sustained as well as all of the hospital records.

That still doesn't erase the doubt a juror might have of why this
is only being brought up now. Pictures of injuries don't prove
that he was the one doing it unless the picture actually shows that,
and I doubt very much that he followed her to the hospital to
continue the beating in front of cameras. Were there actual witnesses
to a beating? Not the injuries after, did they actually see *him*
beating her?

Post by Matt
For some reason at the time they could not go along with the
prosecution alone without her (which I believe is different now). LA

If your star witness won't testify, or has to be forced to testify,
you'll have a much worse case. It will show to the jurors in attitude.
Not taking such a case to court may be more of choice on the part of
the prosecutor not to waste time on a poor case than any law.

A change in the law may not matter. If, for example, the penalty
for kidnapping using a threat of eviction was increased from 10
years to 27 consecutive death penalties, the penalty *as it was at
the time of the crime* still applies. There's this constitutional
problem of an "ex post facto" law, which says you can't make things
illegal after the fact. Whether it would apply to what cases are
prosecuted and which are not is a different issue.

Post by Matt
law has changed as well since then.
I have sent a message to the FBI to see if I can get some
clarification as well. I believe she just wanted to know the legal
ramifications and what is possible.
I don't think she has ever truly ever gotten over everything and has
stayed with this man out of fear.

It may be hard to get that across to jurors.

Post by Matt
Money is not her motive here. Her financial troubles are only a
temporary issue at the moment. Besides that, LA is a community
property state and she would only what what she is entitled to.

Prosecuting a kidnapping because she wants a divorce is also something
I as a juror would not look kindly on. It's another motive for
her to lie about the kidnapping.

Did you know that it's standard practice in a divorce case to allege
that the other party abused the kids, whether they did or not?
Whether the "kids" are now grandparents or not? Sometimes even
whether there ever were any kids or not?