Replies

And, of course, her admission to using weapons to "scare" Shipman is a confession to the assault charge.

Absolutely. That an assault occurred is not in dispute.

It is the greater charge of attempted kidnapping and attempted murder that requires a juror to go along with a number of assumptions that Nowak would have, beyond a reasonable doubt, continued on a certain path to the point where a kidnapping, followed by murder would have taken place. That path is long and frought with speculation and alternative outcomes to consider.

It is not enough that Nowak prepared for the possibility of kidnap and murder. She had to be carrying it out, and the maceing actually pretty much guaranteed she WOULD NOT have been able to carry it out, as a matter of fact.

Fate had taken a turn away from the possibility for kidnapping and murder and to "attempt" in the eyes of the law requires more than intent. It requires an action of carrying it out.

It is my belief and contention that by the point where an assault occurred, any potential plan to kidnap and murder WAS ALREADY NULLIFIED AND DIVERTED.

Her "target of opportunity" was to assault with mace, and she succeeded. Every other charge must be dropped.

She had to be carrying it out, and the maceing actually pretty much guaranteed she WOULD NOT have been able to carry it out, as a matter of fact.

I would argue that by macing Shipman she was attempting to get control of the vehicle before Shipman drove off, and that she would have been quite capable of still carrying out the kidnapping - if Shipman had been sufficiently disoriented by the mace Nowak could have gained access to the vehicle, knocked Shipman out with the steel mallet in her bag, tied her up with the rubber tubing in her bag, concealed her in the garbage bags she brought in her bag and driven off the lot in Shipman's car with an unconscious, hefty-bagged Shipman concealed under Shipman's luggage, Nowak's bag and Nowak's trenchcoat.

The term "kidnapping" means forcibly, secretly, or by threat confining, abducting, or imprisoning another person against her or his will and without lawful authority, with intent to:
1. Hold for ransom or reward or as a shield or hostage.
2. Commit or facilitate commission of any felony.
3. Inflict bodily harm upon or to terrorize the victim or another person.
4. Interfere with the performance of any governmental or political function.

FL Crimes Code Sec. 787.01(1)(a)

A person who attempts to commit an offense prohibited by law and in such attempt does any act toward the commission of such offense, but fails in the perpetration or is intercepted or prevented in the execution thereof, commits the offense of criminal attempt, ranked for purposes of sentencing as provided in subsection (4). FL. Crimes Code Sec 777.04

Given the language of the law, I don't think that attempting kidnapping is a reach at all.

What must be proven for attempted kidnapping:

----

FL. Jury Instructions

5.1 ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CRIME § 777.04(1), Fla.Stat.

Use when attempt is charged or is a lesser included offense.

[To prove the crime of Attempt to Commit (crime charged), the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:]

Use when necessary to define "attempt" as an element of another crime (such as felony murder).

[In order to prove that the defendant attempted to commit the crime of (crime charged), the State must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:]

1. (Defendant) did some act toward committing the crime of (crime attempted) that went beyond just thinking or talking about it.

2. [He] [She] would have committed the crime except that

a. [someone prevented [him] [her] from committing the crime of (crime charged).]

b. [[he] [she] failed.]

Defense. § 777.04(5)(a), Fla.Stat.

It is not an attempt to commit (crime charged) if the defendant abandoned [his] [her] attempt to commit the offense or otherwise prevented its commission, under circumstances indicating a complete and voluntary renunciation of [his] [her] criminal purpose.