This is a serious implication on the criminal justice system.
False imprisonment may actually start with framing. It corrupts the justice process by trivializing the evidence it is supposed to rely on to give a ruling in the cases before it. It presents no particular harm to the defendant who may falsify the evidence to escape prosecution. On the contrary, it renders the criminal justice system impotent and not capable of instilling justice. Falsifying evidence jeopardizes the criminal justice system, in fact, more than the victim. When that happens, we are only addressing the harm done to the criminal justice system and not the person falsely imprisoned. If one of the basic functions of criminal law is to condemn any conduct that society considers blameworthy, then false imprisonment seriously implicates it (Brenner, 2010).
This refers to forcefully seizing a person and taking him/her to a place where he/she is unlikely to be found with the aim of holding him/her for ransom or abducting him/her with the intention of harassing him/her either physically, mentally or sexually, taking him/her hostage and several other reasons (Legal-explanations.com 2007).
According to Gilmore, kidnapping charges have serious implications on the criminal justice system. While the perpetrator may be sentenced to 15 years, this could potentially yield to a mere three to nine years. This looks like an injustice, considering the immensity of the crime committed.
The criminal justice system involves the filing of charges followed by the issuance of a warrant of arrest then the transmission of an extradition request all which make the process of prosecution. However, each case determines itself. The criminal justice system does not necessarily guarantee the return of the kidnapped child and this may delay and complicate the due process of law. Perhaps this