oneway

Hostage (2005) IMDB rating: 6.70 Plot: Jeff Talley, a former LAPD hostage negotiator, has moved himself away from his failed career outside of Los Angeles, and away from his wife and daughter. When a convenience store robbery goes wrong in his turf, the three perpetrators move in on an unsuspecting family. But the family’s father has a secret which might compromise his kin, and one of the criminals is about to jump over the edge. Jeff Talley has to get everybody to survive the night……if he can.

Actors: Pollak Kevin,Willis Bruce,Foster Ben,Bennett Jimmy,Tucker Jonathan,Allman Marshall,Coates Kim,Knepper Robert,Doherty Ransford,Roberts Michael D.,Thriller,Drama,Crime,Action,

Is kidnapping children okay as long as its done by adoption agency's?
What are the Aps going to tell this girl when she or a neighbor comes across this photo and reward?

http://poundpuplegacy.org/node/28527

What kind of person/AP would hold a child hostage that was kidnapped from their mother?

---

I suspect cruel people like that don’t care much what they would tell this poor child. That is beyond inhumane and everyone involved should be charged.

That is so disgusting I can barely "speak".

So…NO OF COURSE NOT….it is not ok to kidnap children…agency or no agency involvement.

Do you really expect anyone here to agree with what these creeps did?

Ferbs | Feb 03, 2010

---

It not legal, but adoption agencies make a huge profit of the kids they place. So most likely the adoptive parents were told some tragic story of her poverty stricken parents, or ‘dead’ parents, and thought that they were doing this girl a favor. Tragic, but happens a lot more then it should.
Panda M | Feb 03, 2010

---

I agree with Ferbs. Who do you think will actually agree with this? Clear cut human trafficking is very different to ethical adoption.
Weeme | Feb 03, 2010

---

That was the whole idea behind the "licensed agency." Laws were passed to legalize the process of child procurement.

Gov’t officials give agencies "licenses" and then they can pretty much do what they want.

Agencies use their ‘license" to separate parents and children. Their word holds up in court. Their words are honored.

If anyone is regulating them at all, it is the same gov’t dept.. Human Services..the fox guarding the henhouse..with few exceptions.

Even when they are found to be committing crimes, it is very hard for parents to get children returned, at least in the USA.
kitta | Feb 03, 2010

---

I think everyone will agree this is a disgusting situation, but why are you assuming the adoptive parents are holding this child "hostage"? Do you know for a fact that the adoptive parents, who it seems are unknown, were told ‘by the way, we just kidnapped this kid, do you want her’? Because I didn’t see anything like that in the story. Was the adoption agency unethical? Of course! But unless we know all the facts we cannot assume the adoptive parents are too.

There is a big difference between illegal kidnapping and ethical adoption. I’m an adult adoptee who was adopted through a private agency – ethically and with the appropriate consent – and I find this story tragic, as would my mom and my bio family as well.
Andie | Feb 03, 2010

---

The U.S. no longer allows the adoption of children from Guatemala because of accusations such as these. The adoption system in Guatemala was done primarily through attorneys in the country. Unfortunately, some attorneys employed extremely unethical practices such as finding children who were not genuinely orphans or pressuring parents to give up their children. Documentation created by Guatemalan attorneys made it look like it was legit. Guatemala is a party to the Hague Convention which spells out regulations for international adoptions, but Guatemala has not actually implemented these regulations fully. Until the system there has been overhauled and fixed to address these issues, adoptions from there are not allowed by the U.S. State Department.

When adoptions were occurring between American families (as well as families from other western countries), these issues were not as well publicized. Most families would be appalled to find out that their child was not truly an orphan and would not hold a child "hostage" from the biological family.

That said, there were many perfectly legit attorneys helping to find homes for truly orphaned children in Guatemala. The overwhelming majority of adoptions were done ethically and correctly. When concerns began coming up, the U.S. State Department started scrutinizing documentation and even requiring DNA tests between the mother and child if she was voluntarily choosing to give her child to adoption.
doxnd1 | Feb 03, 2010

---

Have you thought about the fact that these AP had NO idea that this child was kidnapped…they were under the impression this little girl had no parents or was unwanted and opened up their home and heart to her.

Its an awful situation but that doesn’t mean these AP’s are holding this child "hostage"..that is taking it a step too far.

NO WHERE does it say they have confirmed that this girl is her kidnapped daughter. she saw a picture and said oh this is my daughter. It might me and in that case she should go back with her mom but I would not just hand over the daughter I’ve accepted as their own and raised for the past 3 or 4 years to a woman who says this might be my child.

It says no where the adoptive parents snatched her…just that the child was put up for adoption to a US couple…they probably had no idea of the situation. Why are they now the big enemy? They are just as much victims as anyone else, they had good intentions of trying to help this girl and had no clue of the circumstances.
LindseyTaylor | Feb 03, 2010

---

Someone desperate. There are those who feel they are above the law. That their wants and needs justify kidnapping, murder, rape, torture, bullying. There are bad people.
Kari N | Feb 03, 2010

---

That kid was not kidnapped. The birthmother had second thoughts. The adoption agency has no need to kidnap ANY child. More than enough birthmothers show up of their own accord to relenquish custody. She isn’t being held hostage from her mother. She just has a new one
VoiceOfReason | Feb 04, 2010

---

Firstly, no, kidnapping is never ok.

Secondly, who are you to presume what the APs will do if/when they find out their adopted child was kidnapped? Do you think all APs are so f-ed up in the head that they don’t find this absolutely reprehensible? Do you expect that all APs could live with this knowledge? Do you think that this wouldn’t be utterly heartbreaking to them as well?

Why do you think that ALL APs are somehow aware that their child might be kidnapped and knowingly abide by it?
Jackie B | Feb 04, 2010

---

It’s never ok, obviously.
kennebunklmt | Feb 04, 2010

Witness for the Prosecution (1957) IMDB rating: 8.10 Plot: Esteemed criminal lawyer Sir Wilfrid Robarts has just returned to practice after suffering a heart attack and is supposed to be on a diet of bland civil suits. But the case of Leonard Vole, a charmer accused of murdering a rich middle-aged widow, proves irresistible — particlularly when Sir Wilfrid meets the accused’s wife, the remarkable Christine Vole. Christine will appear as a witness: not the defense, but for the prosecution.

Online Movies World

Actors: Power Tyrone,Laughton Charles,Williams John,Daniell Henry,Wolfe Ian,Thatcher Torin,Compton Francis,Tonge Philip,Farnum Franklyn,Kenny Colin,Drama,Thriller,Mystery,

Is evidence found by a search warrant in Canada still admissible despite the wrong address on the warrant.?
While in court I noticed a Lawyer view a copy of a disclosure with his client. To my surprise and confusion, when the defendant noticed that the address on the warrant was wrong, and brought this to the attention of his lawyer concerning the validity of the warrant and any Charter of Rights implications surrounding a defence or Ha-beaus Corpus rights for his release from custody. The lawyer merely corrected the address in front of the Judge, Prosecutor and Court, and with a condescending shrug ignored him. I’m tired of this sycophantic attitude I’ve noticed of some defence lawyers who seem to forget that in the adversarial legal system (not justice system) of our courts in our Country- a vigorous defence is still expected, notwithstanding Legal Adi’s ability to inadequately compensate. I’m reluctant to contact the Law Society, but I’m wondering who else may suffer . Is there any professional misconduct that is seemingly being ignored because of the disparity between legal aid fees not representative of the expectations, the working poor, can expect from legal counsel. The behaviour I witnessed at this bail hearing (which was denied) involves more than just the validity of the search warrant. In fact this lawyer did nothing to correct the prosecutions attempt to have the defendants, "show cause" at this Kangaroo’s Court. It was the Judge himself that stepped in and "Counselled" the guy, who was scratching his head while terms like, "reverse onus" was certainly confusing him.
If the mistake was a clerical error, or falls under the "made in good faith" category, is this the end of it. I realize anything seen in open view once the police are inside is admissible. What about evidence uncovered that was not the items listed on the warrant and found only by benefit of vigorous disruption and destruction of a locked office desk drawer. There was no, "hot pursuit", life endangerment or injury or possible destruction of evidence issues that would allow for a search without warrant. Any thoughts, opinions or experiences would be greatly appreciated.

---

An error in the address would not necessarily invalidate the warrant. Yes, in most cases, facial validity issues can invalidate a warrant but at the same time a warrant does not need a specific address to be valid (one can’t get an address on a field, on a house in a rural area with no definable street address or even on a dumpster or container).

If anything, it should have been the subject of a voir dire to determine the validity of the warrant. The minimum standard used for the warrant though is "would the information contained in the warrant still provide an adequate indication of the location to be searched". Also, one would have to take a look at the ITO (Information To Obtain the warrant) to determine if the error on the warrant form was just a clerical or transcription error or if it was an error that was continued throughout the ITO and warrant process. If it was a good faith error then there would be no reason to overturn the warrant.

As far as other items seized through the warrant, be they items in plain view or items from a locked cabinet, if they have the warrant and it remains valid then they do have the right to look where ever things named in the warrant may reasonably be found. If my warrant is to uncover rings and stolen jewelry then I am reasonable in opening, by force even, a locked cabinet or drawer as they could be in there. If, on the other hand, my warrant is for a stolen TV then I’m not justified in opening the locked drawer or cabinet. That is why, if they are looking for a stolen TV, they may also include smaller items like the remote control for the TV or for the owners manual as that will allow entry into smaller places.

If, in your example, the warrant is tossed though then the voir dire will determine if all of the evidence should be tossed as well or if the crime is of such seriousness that the tossing of the evidence will bring the administration of justice into greater disrepute then the error of the warrant (ie: is it better to let a murderer off due to a faulty warrant or is justice better served by allowing the warrant, with sanctions, and still getting the murderer).

Randy B | Jan 03, 2010

---

Any legal document with a factual error on it is null and void.

If the DEFENDANT’S attorney deliberately screwed over his own client like that and you are willing to testify before the Bar in his disbarment hearing… REPORT HIM! Better yet, contact the poor schmuck and have HIM file the complaint with the Courts AND the Bar.

Here’s the fun part…what the defendant’s lawyer did was a CRIMINAL OFFENCE. It is Illegal to tamper with Court Documents.

As soon as the defendant mentioned that the address on the Warrant was wrong, he should have moved for an immediate Dismissal of Charges, citing the incorrect address on the Warrant.

As much as I LOVE to see people like this guy get shafted…YOU might be next!
Who knows…he might actually be stupid enough to claim the evidence when the case is tossed…meaning he can be arrested for possession of it at the station!

Good Luck!

PS: If you are a Lawyer, or are planning to become a Lawyer, you have an Ethical Duty to report this sort of behaviour to the Society.
jcurrieii | Jan 01, 2010

---

An incorrect address on the search warrant does not automatically equal the exclusion of evidence. For example, the warrant may have been ordered for the correct address, but a clerical error lead to the incorrect address being written on the warrant.

In any event, even if it was found that section 8 Charter rights were breached because of the incorrect address, the court would have to consider three things before throwing the evidence out under 24(2):

The fairness of the trial
The seriousness of the Charter Breach
Whether the exclusion of the evidence would bring the administration of justice to disrepute.

It would appear that the defence lawyer holds the opinion, having had full disclosure to the case, this wouldn’t be able to pass the 24(2) test.
Tdot | Jan 01, 2010

---

Tdot is correct. Furthermore, although clerical errors are a sign of bad administration, the spirit of the warrant would likely be upheld, depending on the error. In most cases, the address will only be one part of the identification of the warrant.
Ken | Jan 01, 2010