Criminal Jury Instructions Home

6.5-3  Kidnapping in the Second Degree -- § 53a-94

The recent case of State v. Salamon, 287 Conn. 509 (2008), introduced a new interpretation of the kidnapping statutes. This instruction will be revised in the near future to conform to that interpretation. Please refer to that case before using this instruction.

Revised to December 1, 2007

The defendant is charged [in count __] with kidnapping in the second degree.  The statute defining this offense reads in pertinent part as follows: 

a person is guilty of kidnapping in the second degree when (he/she) abducts another person.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Abducted another person
The first element is that the defendant abducted <insert name of abducted person>.  "Abduct" means to restrain a person with the intent to prevent (his/her) liberation by <insert as appropriate:>

• secreting or holding (him/her) in a place where (he/she) is not likely to be found.  There need be no specific proof of the use of force, but merely proof that the defendant effectively secreted <insert name of abducted person> or left (him/her) in a place (he/she) was not likely to be found.

• using or threatening to use physical force or intimidation.  The defendant does not need to actually use force.  (He/she) need only threaten to use force in such a manner that <insert name of abducted person> reasonably believed that force would be applied to (him/her) if (he/she) sought to escape.

"Restrain" means to intentionally restrict a person's movements in such a manner as to interfere substantially with (his/her) liberty by <insert as appropriate:>

• moving (him/her) from one place to another.

• confining (him/her) in some place.  This could be either at the place where the restraint began or at a place to which (he/she) has been moved. 

Abduction and restraining must be intentional.  There must be an intent to interfere substantially with the other person's liberty and an intent to prevent the person's liberation by <insert as appropriate:>

• secretly hiding (him/her) in a place where (he/she) is not likely to be found.

• by using or threatening to use physical force or intimidation.

A person acts "intentionally" with respect to a result when (his/her) conscious objective is to cause such result.  <See Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1.> 

Element 2 - Without consent
The second element is that <insert name of abducted person> did not consent to the restraint.  <Insert as appropriate:>

• <If person abducted is an adult:>  "Without consent" includes, but is not limited to, deception by the defendant.

• <If person abducted is less than sixteen or an incompetent person:>  Without consent in this case means by any means whatever,¹ including acquiescence of the person, if (he/she) is (a child less than sixteen years old / an incompetent person) and (the parent or guardian / person or institution having lawful control or custody of (him/her)) has not acquiesced in the movement or confinement.

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant 1) intentionally abducted <insert name of abducted person>, and 2) did so without (his/her) consent.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of kidnapping in the second degree, then you shall find the defendant guilty.  On the other hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.
_______________________________________________________

¹ The "any means whatever" language was intended "to protect young children and incompetent persons from being kidnapped when the victim agrees to go with the kidnapper because of promises of favors or gifts.  A competent adult's actual consent to the restraint would negate lack of consent if not induced by deception, force, fear or shock; in other words, with no compulsion or deception. . . .  The 'any means whatever' language should not be given in an instruction when . . . the victim is a competent adult."  State v. Benjamin, 86 Conn. App. 344, 355 (2004).