The collected musings of Ryan Elder

In real life this could be a problem, but in fiction this is far within the boundaries of "suspension of disbelief"

I'm sorry to tell this but the whole fake murder scene depicts this gang as being not-so-serious. If they require the new recruit to kill someone as an exam then they need to be serious and they need to look serious. Real criminals would instead make sure to choose a location where the cops can't get them and tell the new member where to go only in the last moment.

Without the victim's body it would be hard to bring the case to court. There are numerous video editing software that can make wonders with any video so using it as the only evidence is not a good way to send someone to jail.

As I understand this video evidence method is used against all members to protect the gang leader (and also other members). If any of them turns against the leader he needs to make sure that the fake victim (on his video) is on his side. That's it.

That makes sense. Bank is out then

It would be plausible but don't forget that he still needs someone who knows where it is, in case the leader is killed. Otherwise members will know that anyone who wants to harm him needs to do a full job and kill him.

It is not a problem for the police to gain access to a bank safe or a lawyer's safe. Technicaly they need to do the same as with a private home: get permission for that from a judge.

 

Okay thanks. When you say that editing software can do wonders for video, are you saying that the hostage having a hood over her head will do no good?

As for the fake hostage, the reason why the gang uses one of their own members, for a fake murder is in case if the guy was an undercover cop. If he is, other cops could be tailing him. Even if the gang gave him a last minute location to go to, the cops could still be surveying their own undercover man, and the gang could very well not know. So the gang wants to use a fake hostage that will not testify, if the blood in turns out to be an undercover sting by any chance.

If the cop turns out to be not be undercover and has no problem pulling the trigger on the fake hostage, then the gang could always give him a second test after and kill someone for real after that first initial test, no?

 

No, I'm saying that a video without the dead body is not enough. Just a few clicks on Youtube and you can see people levitate, ride sharks or do UFO autopsy. If the video is the only evidence, you can bet that a video expert will analyze it and if it's not the real thing he will prove it as fake in a minute.

If this is their concern the gang could separate the "exam" (fake murder) and "collateral" (real murder recorded) parts, so they have real evidence against the new gang member.
Don't forget that you still need to provide a very good reason for someone to trust them so much to intentionally give them practically total control over himself.

See my comment in the previous paragraph.

 

After reading your last comment all i get is that , you can't make your MC do it by himself.

But, you can make your MC set up all the things like cogs in machine to eventually let the other character (cop/detective) find the clue and bring it in, Or something like that.

All i am trying to say is just bringing another character to bail out your MC from a tough situation seems kind of fake and forced to me but you can pull it in such a way that eventually your MC is the mastermind behind the solution. Because its his fight.

Or else involve the second character from the start. If the ending makes sense to you, then go ahead.

 

Okay thanks. Even though the murder is fake on video, the person is still seen doing a blood in on video. So even though the person cannot be charged with murder, he can still be tied to conspiracy and thus, his credibility as a witness would be ruined, should he decide to betray the gang.

The point of the blood in is to have collateral, but you don't need to have evidence of murder to be collateral. Discrediting the witness with evidence of conspiracy, is enough, isn't?

He is caught on video doing a blood in with the same gang. Even if the no 0ne is murdered in the blood in, taking part in a blood in, is still a conspiracy crime in itself, isn't it? It would still discredit the new recruit if he goes to the cops.

 

Hmmm. I misunderstood you. I supposed that the evidence is kept by the gang leader for cases when a gang member tries to kill him. Now I see that it is more like striking back at the court.

 

Oh, what do you mean when you say when a gang member tries to kill him?

 

You said that the gang leader collects collateral "on his fellow members, that he has arranged to go to the police, should they betray him". The term "arranged" suggests that he prepared this in case he can't do it himself, like he is arrested by the police or killed by a fellow gang member.
Telling others that he has evidence that can be used against them and this evidence is going to be sent to the police if he dies would ensure that they won't turn against him and won't kill him.

 

Yep he would have some sort of arrangement for it to go to the police if he dies. But the story never gets that far, since he never dies. I want the police to find the package, of all the blood in videos as evidence against the members. So it never gets as far as the gang leader dying.

One thing in my story is, is that the main cop character who is after the gang, has to figure out that there is a package of blood in videos, being used as collateral. He already knows there is one video from a suspected blood in. By suspected I mean that the MC theorized that a blood in was recorded based on crime scene evidence from early on in the story.

Can the MC say to the cops "if they recorded one blood in, they might have recorded all the others. The gang leader might be keeping them all someplace as collateral. We should see if we could find it".

Or is this too much of a leap for the MC to theorize? Would it be worth him risking his life, if it's just a theory and he does not know for certain at all, that this package of blood in videos exists somewhere?

 

Simple, with a lawyer. Plenty of them are corrupt and they're bound by confidentiality. Upon my death send these packages to X place.

 

Well if the lawyer keeps them, then that won't work for the plot because the macguffin would then be legally 'privileged', and the police would not be able to find a way to seize it legally, would they?

 

Okay thanks for the advice.

When it comes to the MC formulating his plan against the villains, to get them arrested with enough evidence to ensure a conviction, every plan I come up with is very fragile. It' s like a building of jenga blocks where if you remove one piece, it all comes tumbling down.

However, this prevents for having anything go wrong for the MC, even if temporarily. Because if something goes wrong, the whole plan is ruined for the entire rest of the story. Nothing can go temporarily wrong, without being ruined entirely, cause the plans are so fragile, that everything has to go right in order for them to work. Even if I write it so that the plan is ruined entirely, and the MC has to come up with a second plan, the situation is already so damaged from the first plan going wrong, that no second plan ever seems to be possible in my writing.

This is the problem I am having. How do you write it so that everything goes wrong, yet things are still recoverable and there is still hope. How does a writer formulate a fixable plan for the MC?

 

For my story, basically a gang is recruiting in a new member and the new member has to pass a 'blood in' test. Basically that is, is that the new member has to spill the blood of another person in order to be accepted.

The gang also secretly video records the blood in, in case the new member decides to turn on them, in that case, the recording can be used as collateral, to incriminate and discredit him.

However, during the blood in, the main character, a cop on patrol, stumbles upon the suspicious activity and ends up stopping the blood in. The gang members get away as the MC saves the victim. The MC sees the gang carrying away a camera on a tripod during their escape.

Much later on in the story, the MC comes up with a guess, that the gang was doing a blood in, and video recording it, based on what he saw. He figures that since the gang was willing to record one member for collateral, that maybe the gang leader recorded every member for collateral at some point.

He figures that these recordings could all be kept at the same place, so he decides to go out and find them. However, is this guess that me makes perhaps too much of a stretch, for him to risk his life over, since pursuing it will cause more violence to happen? Even though his guess is correct, it is still just a guess, and is that type of risk, worth the reward, even if he is obsessed with getting them?

 

Short answer, yes. It seems perfectly feasible (and I've seen plenty of films/tv shows where the MC risks their life and others for less).

 

It depends on wheter or not you're going to make him act on his own or with the police. Wouldn't it make more sense to talk about his suspicions to other members of the force ? Unless the police is rotten to the core and corrupted, there is no logical way that the man wouldn't report such an important fact.
However, it could go like this : MC sees the tripod, reports it without thinking to much. Then something reminds him of that, and he ponders about it. Quite a long time. He then goes to report it to some higher-up that just laugh him off and tell him to get back to serious work. He then wants to prove by himself how right he is, and goes on to do the whole thing.
That would make more sense, given he is a cop, but then, it gives a really important place to this event and I don't know what your story is really about

 

Well I wanted him to act on his own. Perhaps the police are not willing to pursue mere hunches compared to him?

Earlier in the story though, he was taken off the case for some reasons. So maybe he doesn't report it, cause he wants to do it himself and feels that if he puts in someone else's hands, it could likely not get done well?

 

Why are these gang members carrying around a tripod? Isn't it more likely that someone would just film it on his phone?

 

Well the video is used as collateral on the other person doing the blood in test, should the person betray the gang. If it comes to the point where the person betrays the gang, and the gang has to send in the video to the police to discredit the man than the video has to be in good quality condition for the court to accept.

They are not going to want the video thrown out of court, and not usable as collateral, cause the court complains that it's too shaky and handheld to make out certain details of what is going on. So I thought that a still image with no handheld movements or shakes to show what happens would be more acceptable to the court.

 

That's simply not true. No court is going to say the video of a murder is too shaky or whatever to be evidence. Think about all the videos taken by someone using a phone. Phones have come a long way in terms of video quality. And I just have a hard time believing these gang members are carrying around a tripod. It just doesn't sound very realistic to me.

 

Okay thanks. Well if they are going to use a phone then, then the MC will have to figure out that the blood in, was filmed another way then.

 

By seeing it?

 

Well the thing, is is that the gang probably doesn't want the person doing the blood in, to know that he is being recorded. This means that they will have to record him from a place, where he cannot see that he is being recorded, like through a wall, with very small window or hole in it for example.

So if the cop can see the person with the phone doing the recording, then he will be be able to see the blood in. If the person doing the recording has to remain hidden, then the MC will have a tough time seeing the blood in, since it's blocked off from the point of view.

But perhaps I can find a way to write it so that he can see both, where as the blood in recruit cannot.

 

Okay thanks. After going over the story, it occurred to me that the prosecution would not only have to make the defense aware of the new witness, but he would also have to tell him that the witness is no longer under arrest. That way, the gang will know to look out for her, at her house. But would the prosecution tell the defense that?

 

Perhaps they've got like a camera room next to the room and the cop starts there because he's doing a tactical takedown of people around the room before he goes in and gets in the middle of it? Maybe being a little stealthy? Think stealth games.
Or perhaps the victim has some idea of what was going on that he tells the cop but the others don't trust the victim and the victim doesn't have much to go on?

 

By victim do you mean the man the gang is recruiting for the blood in, or the actual victim who the target has to spill the blood of, to get in?