# Would this type of climax be plausible?



## ironpony (Jan 31, 2016)

I am writing a thriller, where the MC, who is a cop, is trying to put a gang of crooks in jail, and I have written several outlines, where he and other police use sting operations to lure the villains into traps and trick them into incriminating themselves.

But I was told before by others that the felt that the villains were too smart to fall for the sting operations that I came up with, and they would see them as traps.

I was wondering, what if the MC took it to much more of an extreme, and kidnapped the gang leader's loved ones, such as siblings or parents...  He then held them ransom and told the gang leader, that he has 36 hours to turn himself into the police with enough evidence, to get him and his gang members charged on all counts, for their crimes.  Whatever evidence he turns in, it has to be enough for a prosecutor to press charges on all the counts listed in the ransom demand.  If he doesn't do it in 36 hours or some other time limit, his family dies.

It's an extreme measure on the MC's part, but since the villain is so smart and cannot be caught by other means, the MC figures that extreme measures are called for in this case.  However, there is always the risk that the villain would go to the police and report the ransom.  He could act totally innocent and pretend that he does not have evidence to support such crimes, that the kidnapper is demanding.

There is always that risk of the villain doing that, but since this is the end of the story, I want the MC's plan to work, with no more rebuttals from the villain.  The villain has to be accept defeat at this point.  If the villain is afraid that the family will be killed from the prosecutor not laying charges in a certain amount of time though, and he turns himself in with the evidence, the family will have to be released, once the charges are filed.  So the family will probably then go to the police, and once the gang leader hears that his family is safe, he will then tell the police that he only turned in evidence and gave himself up cause someone kidnapped his family, and he most likely knows who, since he has had problems with that cop in the past.

However, the prosecutor or judge in the case, can look at this two ways.  Either they will buy the family and him saying he was turned in to save his family, and feel that the evidence is tainted as a result of his claim.  Or he will still try the case, and just think of the villain and his family as trying to come up with the story as an excuse to renege on him turning himself in.  The judge might just say it's a renege, and their is no substantial proof of a kidnapping, and he cannot drop the charges, just by taking someone's word over it who is most likely trying to renege and cover his arse.

What do you think?  Is this ending more plausible, for the villain to be brought down and defeated rather than falling for stings?


----------



## Harper J. Cole (Feb 1, 2016)

I think, more than the plausibility angle, you need to consider whether you're creating a sympathetic hero. Audiences aren't likely to identify with an MC who kidnaps innocent children and then lies about it in court. The idea of a sting operation would probably work better from that angle.



> The judge might just say it's a renege, and *their* is no substantial proof of a kidnapping, and he cannot drop the charges, just by taking someone's word over it who is most likely trying to renege and cover his arse.




Please note that this should be "there", not "their"; the latter word shows possession, e.g. "their guns" or "their ideas". It's important, when you eventually send your script off, that SPaG errors are avoided, as these will put off your readers far more quickly than plot holes.

HC


----------



## Ultraroel (Feb 1, 2016)

Focus less on plausibility, focus more on making it sensible in your writing.

I think we've had this discussion with you more. Make the choice you want it to be and make sure you write it so it sounds plausible or acceptable.
You are the one who is in control of the perception of the readers.. edit: Up to some degree


----------



## Sam (Feb 1, 2016)

Would you like someone to write the story for you? 

Because at this point, it sure seems like it.


----------



## bdcharles (Feb 1, 2016)

I think if a cop snatched a villain's kids and held them to ransom to entice said perp to do some more villainy stuff, then he or she would find themselves off the force pretty quick and most likely in jail for entrapment. What you need is some subtle little inadvertant thing that sends the villain over the edge and makes him do a bunch of crime, or have the crooks continue with their life of crime as normal, and have the cop smart enough to catch them. Otherwise your good guy sounds worse than the bad guy! 

I wonder if you have painted yourself into a plot corner here. You have all these pieces set up but the only way they can resolve is for the cop to get corrupt. Maybe you can pursue that angle. Otherwise you will need to just think of an invrentive way round it. I find it helps to have my plot laid out very simply, like a sequence of steps, almost like a computer program or a to do list, and make sure everything hangs together. If you come up against a situation where you cannot get it to resolve without some massive implausibility, you may need to re-address the story. Remember: things don't have to be monstrously byzantine, they just have to be interesting.

The only reason I say all ths of course is because I have done exactly the same thing, created a massive tangled plot and then spent months trying to unravel it. And while I think I managed it, sometimes the writing really showed what an effort it was and I've spent alot of time putting an extra glossy sheen back on it


----------



## Book Cook (Feb 1, 2016)

I don't think a gang leader would believe that a cop would harm a family, or that he would be able to get aways with it. I see a lot of ways this could easily backfire on the cop.


----------



## Kyle R (Feb 1, 2016)

ironpony said:
			
		

> What do you think?


I think you worry too much about your story meeting the approval of others.

I also think you should focus, instead, on writing the story that _you_ want to write.

And to answer your question: Yes, it's plausible. _Anything_ is plausible, in my opinion. There's no wrong way to write a story. It's just a matter of selling it to the audience.

Now quit following and start leading. Stop asking and start doing. Be bold and go for it, in whichever direction you choose. :encouragement:


----------



## Bishop (Feb 1, 2016)

I have to ask; all of these threads, are they the same story? Because you've written a small novel just asking questions about this script. At that point, I'm wondering how it can form a coherent narrative, when there's this many caveats and addendum to the storyline. This might be a forest-for-the-trees situation, but I really don't think we can make major plot decisions about your story without actually reading/seeing it to determine where the issues are.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 1, 2016)

Bishop said:


> I have to ask; all of these threads, are they the same story? Because you've written a small novel just asking questions about this script. At that point, I'm wondering how it can form a coherent narrative, when there's this many caveats and addendum to the storyline. This might be a forest-for-the-trees situation, but I really don't think we can make major plot decisions about your story without actually reading/seeing it to determine where the issues are.



I have been asking the same question for weeks. Every time someone else answers one of his questions and makes a suggestion he always comes up with a "yeah, but..." in response.

I think this story might be a different one than the original threads but with as many "yeah, but"  and '"is this plausible" threads it's really hard to tell.


----------



## DaBlaRR (Feb 1, 2016)

It's all the same story. I've been following it for sometime. The only thing I don't know is the names of the characters...yet.

Is there any part of this screenplay... JUST ONE PART that you can say that you are happy with and want to keep? Is there any part that you didn't get other peoples opinions on? 

I take pride in what I create, good or bad. I just can't see how a person can take pride in a story that they get other people to write for them. Opinions here and there is completely fine, but you are so all over the place that it hurts my brain.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 1, 2016)

I am all for being encouraging and offering tips or suggestions. The encouragement and genuine desire for people to succeed that I found here is one of the biggest reasons I am still active here.

But at what point do we all just leave someone to sink or swim on their own? How much of someone's story are we willing to write without asking for a piece of the pie since we are doing all the work?


----------



## ironpony (Feb 1, 2016)

T.S.Bowman said:


> I have been asking the same question for weeks. Every time someone else answers one of his questions and makes a suggestion he always comes up with a "yeah, but..." in response.
> 
> I think this story might be a different one than the original threads but with as many "yeah, but"  and '"is this plausible" threads it's really hard to tell.



Sorry I don't mean to reject advice.  Basically a lot of times, when I ask if something will work, I get responses, saying that something else would happen instead.  Which is fine, but if that is no where related to how I want the story to go, I then have to keep thinking of new ideas, to see if they work.  If an idea, doesn't work, I can't just say okay, and write it that way, and have that be the story.  I have to keep coming up with something else, until I find a way to get from A to Z.  I have the premise (A), and I have a good idea of the ending I want (Z), I just have to find a way to get from one to the other, that works.

As far as the good guy becoming unsympathetic, I am not too worried about that since reader's like antiheroes all the time.  In 24, for example, Jack Bauer shot a villain's wife in the leg to get him to talk, and the wife didn't really know anything of any of the crimes her husband was committing, so I think that if I have a kidnapping, I shouldn't be crossing the line too much, should I?


----------



## Sam (Feb 1, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Sorry I don't mean to reject advice.  Basically a lot of times, when I ask if something will work, I get responses, saying that something else would happen instead.  Which is fine, but if that is no where related to how I want the story to go



Then write the story the way you want to write it and stop worrying what people say.


----------



## ironpony (Feb 1, 2016)

Okay you're right, I will stop worrying so much. I just want to be good, and do it right, of course.

Well I have written a few outlines, and there are two I can go by.  One is written with a lot of realism, but I feel is kind of restricted in going in certain directions, and is a more underwhelming perhaps.  But on the plus side, reader's will not have to suspend disbelief as much, and can be considered more plausible.

The other throws a lot of realism out the window in the interest of generating more suspense, but more suspension of disbelief is required.  Which type of outline would be the better one to use, do you think?


----------



## Sam (Feb 1, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Okay you're right, I will stop worrying so much. I just want to be good, and do it right, of course.
> 
> Well I have written a few outlines, and there are two I can go by.  One is written with a lot of realism, but I feel is kind of restricted in going in certain directions, and is a more underwhelming perhaps.  But on the plus side, reader's will not have to suspend disbelief as much, and can be considered more plausible.
> 
> The other throws a lot of realism out the window in the interest of generating more suspense, but more suspension of disbelief is required.  Which type of outline would be the better one to use, do you think?



I can't answer that question. It's something you'll have to figure out for yourself. 

I'm not saying this to be difficult, but the only way you'll figure out the majority of the things you're asking is through trial and error.


----------



## Bishop (Feb 1, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Which type of outline would be the better one to use, do you think?



The one you pick.

Just pick one. At this point, it's down to that.


----------



## bdcharles (Feb 1, 2016)

ironpony said:


> As far as the good guy becoming unsympathetic, I am not too worried about that since reader's like antiheroes all the time.  In 24, for example, Jack Bauer shot a villain's wife in the leg to get him to talk, and the wife didn't really know anything of any of the crimes her husband was committing, so I think that if I have a kidnapping, I shouldn't be crossing the line too much, should I?



Yep you may well be right, now that I think about it. That could work. For your story, I wonder if the goal maybe ought to be not to get people's buy-in to whether your stuff is plausible, but to simply script your story the way you visualise it, plot holes and realism be damned, because if you get overly hung up on those things, you'll never move forward, your characters will never develop, and that's half the joy - having them take on new life of their own and change the story and all sorts. I've seen people being completely over-advised, so much so that their original story and voice gets utterly decimated and lost. So just put it down the way you want it. Then you will have something tangible to work with, and will have gained confidence and experience and more skills. You may look back on what you're writing now one day and think it's bad, but that's better than having nothing to look back on, and anyway, you can always redraft. 

Good luck


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 2, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Sorry I don't mean to reject advice.  Basically a lot of times, when I ask if something will work, I get responses, saying that something else would happen instead.  Which is fine, but if that is no where related to how I want the story to go, I then have to keep thinking of new ideas, to see if they work.  If an idea, doesn't work, I can't just say okay, and write it that way, and have that be the story.  I have to keep coming up with something else, until I find a way to get from A to Z.  I have the premise (A), and I have a good idea of the ending I want (Z), I just have to find a way to get from one to the other, that works.
> 
> As far as the good guy becoming unsympathetic, I am not too worried about that since reader's like antiheroes all the time.  In 24, for example, Jack Bauer shot a villain's wife in the leg to get him to talk, and the wife didn't really know anything of any of the crimes her husband was committing, so I think that if I have a kidnapping, I shouldn't be crossing the line too much, should I?



My post wasn't about you rejecting advice, although sometimes you do. It was more about asking us for too much as far as what to do with YOUR story. You are a writer. It is your job to do the necessary research and work the story until it WORKS. We can, and are willing to, offer some advice on some things. But there are things that only you, as the writer of the story, are going to be able to work out.

What you need to realize is that when you have a whole bunch of writers (also known as readers) telling you that what you really really WANT to work isn't working. At that point, you have two choices. You can listen to them and come up with another way to get to your desired ending. Or you can do what some others have suggested and just write the story the way you want it to go and say to hell with the criticisms.


----------



## bazz cargo (Feb 2, 2016)

Arse on seat, fingers on keyboard, turn off the internet and write.  Come back for some RnR and when you have something that needs some polish.

Good luck
BC


----------



## Bloggsworth (Feb 2, 2016)

Oops, wrong thread and no delete button...


----------



## denmark423 (Feb 2, 2016)

Try to make things more of a reality to make it more believable for readers. And be careful with word usage. Have them double checked.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 3, 2016)

bazz cargo said:


> Arse on seat, fingers on keyboard, turn off the internet and write.  Come back for some RnR and when you have something that needs some polish.
> 
> Good luck
> BC



Somehow, Bazz, I don't think that's gonna work.


----------



## ironpony (Feb 3, 2016)

Okay thanks.  When it comes to realism, I did some research and found out that cops in real life do not carry their firearms while off duty.  But for my story I would like the main character cop to have his for protection while off duty.  If I made it up that it is normal to have his with him while off duty, would audiences loose disbelief over that, or could they accept it?  It would be better for my main character, rather than choosing to arrest armed men, with no firearm on him, but what do you think?


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 3, 2016)

:indecisiveness:

For heaven's sake PICK A SCENARIO and write the dang thing!

Stop being so anal and write it. You will never satisfy everyone. 

Just so you know, you needed a little better research. Police officers DO carry guns when they are off duty. They just don't carry their service weapon. Just to make sure I am clear and there is no further room for questioning...they do not carry their service weapon that is issued by the department. An off duty officer might have four guns on him but the weapon issued by the department will, in 99.999% of the cases, NOT be one of them.

See, Bazz. Told ya it wouldn't work.


----------



## Ultraroel (Feb 3, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  When it comes to realism, I did some research and found out that cops in real life do not carry their firearms while off duty.  But for my story I would like the main character cop to have his for protection while off duty.  If I made it up that it is normal to have his with him while off duty, would audiences loose disbelief over that, or could they accept it?  It would be better for my main character, rather than choosing to arrest armed men, with no firearm on him, but what do you think?



Again mate. make your story fit. I bet not all cops are the same in every country, so "a cop doesn't carry it off duty"  may be different in another country or society. 
Use your imagination and words to convince your audience. Man, I really hope you can come up with a reason to carry his gun.. should seriously not be that hard.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 3, 2016)

I think the better hope would be I  hoping he can come up with a good reason why it HAS to be his service weapon when a cop cou,D easily purchase as many guns as he desired for 'protection.'


----------



## ironpony (Feb 3, 2016)

Oh okay, well I live in Canada, where I might set the story in as well.  Here a cop cannot carry a personal gun while off duty, cause there are laws against it.  They can keep one at home, but cannot carry on one them, unless it's in a special locked box, which takes too long to open in a situation like that... As far as I know, but I will ask about personal pistols, vs. service ones.

And yes I did start a new outline.  I can start typing, it's just I feel I should finish the whole outline first, otherwise, I do not have the clearest vision of where I am going from point A to point Z.  But I have already written about half of it.


----------



## Ultraroel (Feb 3, 2016)

Man.. Allowed or not allowed. You can still come up with a valid reason to carry a gun. A threat to his person might be enough to make an exception to the rule. A feeling of being in danger, as he noticed people following him. Simply forgetting to put it away on a right moment.. so many possibilities, just find one that fits your characters personality. If this is the same story, the department also lets him go undercover without any kind of control, so why mind so much when he carries a gun on him..
Come on pal, you can come up with these things as well...


----------



## Flint (Feb 3, 2016)

ironpony said:


> What do you think?  Is this ending more plausible, for the villain to be brought down and defeated rather than falling for stings?



Or, you could have both, I guess: the villain's family, horrified by the villain's behaviour, agree to a fake kidnapping/sting operation by the police in order to bring the villain down.

At the end of the day, the plausibility will lie in how you write it rather than the bare plot/outline itself, IMO. Good luck


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 3, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Oh okay, well I live in Canada, where I might set the story in as well.  Here a cop cannot carry a personal gun while off duty, cause there are laws against it.  They can keep one at home, but cannot carry on one them, unless it's in a special locked box, which takes too long to open in a situation like that... As far as I know, but I will ask about personal pistols, vs. service ones.
> 
> And yes I did start a new outline.  I can start typing, it's just I feel I should finish the whole outline first, otherwise, I do not have the clearest vision of where I am going from point A to point Z.  But I have already written about half of it.



Then don't set it in Canada. You seems to have a bit of masochist about you. You seem to want to write things that ma,E it as difficult on yourself as possible.

If it's not allowed in Canada then DONT SET THE STORY THERE.


----------



## ironpony (Feb 3, 2016)

Well since it's a low budget screenplay, I want to set it there, cause it would be more believable since all the actors will probably have Canadian accents and what not.  I don't think I could convincingly fake it for the U.S., for audiences.

As for him having the gun while undercover, he is only undercover in the opening, and this is after his cover his blown, that I want him to carry a gun.  But I don't know what the penalty is for carrying it, outside of the lock box, and whether or not that will affect the case?  For example, if carrying the gun outside the box, is a felony, and he makes an arrest, then will the evidence stick in court, if he committed a felony, as to how the arrest was made?

I will have to research that one.


----------



## DaBlaRR (Feb 3, 2016)

Seriously dude? Who cares about our laws (I'm Canadian too)... Why do you need a lawful reason for him to pack heat? Just have him carry a fricken gun with no explanation to how or why he could legally do it... Do you think people who watch or read your story are going to say...."Hmmmm this is in Canada. Their gun laws don't permit him to be carrying that weapon." 



Last I heard a cop taking in the villains family for ransom to get a reaction from the criminal is also illegal....Not only in Canada either....(I'm taking this from one of your other questions).


----------



## ironpony (Feb 3, 2016)

Yes but this gun scenario happens before the cop becomes a criminal and kind of needs a legal reason to have it at this point.  I can just write it like that then with no explanation, if that's better.


----------



## DaBlaRR (Feb 3, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Yes but this gun scenario happens before the cop becomes a criminal and kind of needs a legal reason to have it at this point.  I can just write it like that then with no explanation, if that's better.



Not sure if you he is your protagonist or not... But a "good guy", who is a rule breaker and has dirt on his hands is my favorite kind of hero.


----------



## bazz cargo (Feb 3, 2016)

Think Dirty Harry.


----------



## kilroy214 (Feb 3, 2016)




----------



## T.S.Bowman (Feb 4, 2016)

ironpony said:


> Yes but this gun scenario happens before the cop becomes a criminal and kind of needs a legal reason to have it at this point.


  For cryin out loud NO HE DOESN'T. He does NOT need a legal reason to carry a gun. He just freakin HAS one because he WANTS to. You are the writer of the story. If you don't want to give him a reason, then don't. If it's going to cause problems in the story, then don't give him a reason. 

Let me tell you something. All this crap you are worrying about? It's only going to MATTER if you aren't a good enough writer to engross the viewer/reader in the first place. If they aren't entertained in the beginning, then and ONLY THEN will they start to pick apart the rest of the story. You seem unwilling to give the viewer/reader the benefit of the doubt as far as their willingness to suspend disbelief when there is a good story to be had. That is going to be your great failure when it comes to this, or ANY, piece of your work.

Ugh. I am all done. This dude has a counterpoint for every single piece of advice and every suggestion. We may as well be running headfirst into a wall repeatedly.


----------



## ironpony (Feb 5, 2016)

Okay thanks.  There is another Canadian law I am worried about.  Basically in my story the cop wants justice and goes out on his own, after the whole case ends tragically.  He goes out on his own, to get his own proof.  But in Canada, you are not allowed to record conversations without a warrant I read.  This makes him being able to get proof that he can make an arrest with and use in court, very difficult to write.  Since he cannot record anything, is there another way of obtaining proof, rather than just using his word?  Or how should I write so that a cop is able to get proof on his own, without a warrant?


----------



## DaBlaRR (Feb 5, 2016)

argh


----------



## Greimour (Feb 5, 2016)

Note: Didn't read all replies. Just let you know before I throw out a comment.


If your criminal is such a genius, he can either foil your MC directly or set him up for the fall. 

Confession under duress doesn't count as a confession. I guess that is why you said he has to take evidence along?

Being the genius that he is, he can create 'fake' evidence. Later he will claim that the ransomer told him to provide evidence (for crimes he didn't commit). With no other choice, he faked some evidence and confessed to everything.


The amount of methods of handling the situation are beyond counting. Just depends on what your criminal is willing to risk.

I am no genius, but the 'confession under duress' knowledge instantly made my mind start to think of many ways I can hand myself in and still get away with it.


----------



## ironpony (Feb 5, 2016)

Yeah, you're right.  I have scraped the idea.  The MC will not make the villain confess under duress.  But the MC cannot record any conversations the villain has with his associates either, since recording private conversations is illegal.  Is their anything else the MC can do?  I read that in my setting, you can record a conversation as long as you are part of it.

What if I had all the villains talk to each other on the phone using voice scrambling devices.  They do this to protect themselves.  What if the MC uses a voice scrambler himself, and calls from a phone with a fake ID to fool the villains, and is then part of the conversation, but in a scrambled voice, just like the others.  The leader tells everyone to meet at a certain place, and the MC goes there as well.  He can then catch the villains incriminating themselves, but he would not have a warrant to enter the premises to confirm that they are incriminating themselves.

So he can have a recorded conversation as long as everyone talks in a scrambled voice as part of their M.O., but he cannot legally enter the premises they are to meet at, without a warrant, which he does not have.  The reason why he cannot get a warrant is because one of them (the only one the police know), was found not guilty, and the prosecutor told the MC to stop chasing his tail.  So he has no warrant to record a conversation, and can only do so if he is a part of it.

He can also not enter on any properties to catch the crooks possibly incriminating themselves.  So with these two things in mind, I am not sure what other methods he could use to catch them.  Is their anything else he can use, or is the law made up so that pretty much no evidence can be obtained by police without a warrant, unless he is part of a conversation, and that's it?


----------



## DaBlaRR (Feb 5, 2016)

If you want to know the real law in Canada... you can legally record any conversation that you are part of without consent of the other person.
you cannot legally record a conversation between two other people as a third party unless you have their consent.

Reference: ME - Had to do these sorts of things legally as part of my job.


----------



## ironpony (Feb 5, 2016)

Yes I know that, but since the villain knows that the MC is after him, he is not going to have a conversation with the MC.  So how can the MC get evidence on the villains if he not allowed to record anything?


----------

