Is it kidnapping to hide a persons keys and wallet to prevent them from leaving the h

[HighwayMan]

Besides, it was likely that wifey had access to a phone or other communications devices of some sort and could have called/texted/emailed someone to bring her a pair of slippers at least.

 

[stealth2]

Besides, it was likely that wifey had access to a phone or other communications devices of some sort and could have called/texted/emailed someone to bring her a pair of slippers at least.

Not everywhere upstate.

 

[Just Blue]

Not everywhere upstate.

Where did OP say s/he was upstate? For all we know s/he is in Queens.

 

[stealth2]

Have you ever BEEN to New York? Not a lot of places in the state that are "10 miles from the closest neighbor". So your "logic" on THIS thread is not logical.

Where did OP say s/he was upstate? For all we know s/he is in Queens.

OP did not. But it was stated that there are not a lot of places as remote as LDi was stating, and that the wife likely had cell service. I was simply noting that there are places upstate that are really quite remote and/or do not have reliable cell service.

 

[HighwayMan]

I was simply noting that there are places upstate that are really quite remote and/or do not have reliable cell service.

There are places like that down state as well.

In a case like that I would assume a household would have a traditional landline.

 

[cbg]

Good Lord, is this still going on?

No. It is not kidnapping to hide a person's keys and wallet to prevent them from leaving the house.

I hope that this is now clear to everyone. Next question please?

 

[justalayman]

In addition to everything else stated, since they are married and there is a great likelihood the car is co-owned, the keys are not the exclusive property of the wife and as such, either party can do whatever they like with the keys regardless of the other party’s desire.

The wallet; likely to be considered exclusive property of the wife. That means theft or conversion but it is irrelevent when considering kidnapping or anything to do with preventing the wife from leaving.

Cellphone may be individual or jointly owned but neither would mean if withheld it would be unlawful restraint.

Even if they are in the most remote place in New York and the terrain is the most inhospitable place on the planet, none of that would result in an unlawful restraining of the party. As long as the wife is not prevented from walking out of the door at their own choosing, there is no unlawful restraint. Now, if the wife was injured or died due to succumbing to the effects of the environment once they left and the withholding of the keys or phone was an underlying cause op was affected, there could possibly be crimes charged.

But that is a whole new can of worms to open.

 

[xylene]

Umm, this sure sounds like a lot of NY domestic cases where serious charges came of denying someone there shoes to leave.

Taking a captive's shoes is like standard procedure.

 

[justalayman]

Umm, this sure sounds like a lot of NY domestic cases where serious charges came of denying someone there shoes to leave.

Taking a captive's shoes is like standard procedure.

That sounds more like the prisoner processing procedure in just about any jail or prison.

 

[cbg]

I'm not denying that there could be some legitimate claims here.

But NOT kidnapping.

 

[xylene]

That sounds more like the prisoner processing procedure in just about any jail or prison.

When are you in jail in your own home?

 

[Just Blue]

When are you in jail in your own home?

Sadly it happens all too often in DV situations.

 

[xylene]

Sadly it happens all too often in DV situations.

Hence it is a serious crime. The useful advice - rather than "no, it's not kidnapping, you asked the wrong question." schtick.

 

[justalayman]

When are you in jail in your own home?

I must have missed your point. You mentioned the removal of shoes to assist in detaining somebody. I don’t see it as much of a hinderance so took it as being in jest. Given it isn’t winter yet I don’t see denying a person their shoes as doing much in the line of detaining them


It is a common practice in jails and prisons though.

 

[justalayman]

Menacing can be charged under the domestic violence umbrella given the personal relationship:

2. He or she repeatedly follows a person or engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts over a period of time intentionally placing or attempting to place another person in reasonable fear of physical injury, serious physical injury or death;  or

That’s the closest I can find that might be applicable. I’m not sure I could see any of the actions listed by the op themselves as meeting the definition of menacing.