Writing Forums

Writing Forums is a privately-owned, community managed writing environment. We provide an unlimited opportunity for writers and poets of all abilities, to share their work and communicate with other writers and creative artists. We offer an experience that is safe, welcoming and friendly, regardless of your level of participation, knowledge or skill. There are several opportunities for writers to exchange tips, engage in discussions about techniques, and grow in your craft. You can also participate in forum competitions that are exciting and helpful in building your skill level. There's so much more for you to explore!

Does anyone know how I can approach this plot hole or plot gap? (1 Viewer)

ironpony

Senior Member
My story is a crime thriller set in modern times but there is something in the plot that I need to happen but I cannot figure out how it could happen at all, no matter how I rethink it.

In the plot, the villains a gang of criminals wants to recruit a new member into their gang. They put the new member through a test by having them commit a crime against a victim. It goes wrong because the new recruit gets cold feet though, and cannot go through with it.

The police discover the scene and arrest one of them, and the others get away. The police do not know who the others are, and only have the one. They also have the victim of the kidnapping who they want to testify against the arrested one. They are hoping to pressure the arrested one into cutting a deal and giving up the others.

The part I am having trouble is, is that the police to have to discover the kidnapping and the crime scene. Usually in these types of stories the police will discover the crime scene, and find clues to build off. However in my story's case, I want the two clues to be people that are found.

But why would the villains leave two whole people behind though, is the tricky part I find to make plausible.

I have point A, which is the test for the new recruit going wrong, and point C, the police arrested one of them, and want the victim to testify against him. But I am not sure what point B would be to get from A to C without making the villains look stupid for leaving two people behind to be found.

Does anyone have any advice on how to approach this? Thanks for any advice on it! I really appreciate it!
 

PiP

Staff member
Co-Owner
A gang of criminals recruit a new gang member. To test commitment (an initiation?) he has to commit a crime which goes wrong because he gets cold feet.

What crime? Why kidnapping if it is only a test? And why are they all there. Surely he could live-video chat the crime as it was being committed. The test goes wrong because:

- He is not very bright and gets caught on CCTV
- Someone reports the crime in progress to the police. They have the mobile phone as evidence and the voices of the other gang members encouraging him during the live chat. So they don't need the victim as it is all on his mobile phone and CCTV.


But why would the villains leave two whole people behind though, is the tricky part I find to make plausible.

because they were disturbed while the crime was in progress? The victim overpowed his attacker and the other gang members fled?
 

ironpony

Senior Member
Oh well the victim is the second most major character in the story and drives a lot of what happens after, so I don't think I could remove her without changing a lot of the rest of the plot around. The reason why I thought that if they kidnap her and set it up there way, is because there is less of a chance going wrong then. If they just give the new recruit an idea and say live stream it to us when you are done, then a whole bunch more things could go wrong and I thought it wouldn't be a smart for the villains to do it that way, or so I thought.

So the villains in the story have been committing a series of kidnaps and sexual assaults as a form of revenge on society, as their crimes, and they want the new recruit into their group to do the same as a test, but he gets cold feet.
 

robertn51

Senior Member
I have point A, which is the test for the new recruit going wrong, and point C, the police arrested one of them, and want the victim to testify against him. But I am not sure what point B would be to get from A to C without making the villains look stupid for leaving two people behind to be found.

How about this?

(this next gets rid of the gang)

The entire gang needn't be present at the initiation task, only the recruit and the victim. The recruit is then supposed to bring the abducted victim to some prearranged meet-up to prove they've done it. And proves they can take and keep control. Good things for a wet-work banger.

This is also more realistic. The gang is not going to expose themselves to the possibility the newbie is going to fail. They don't want to be anywhere near the event -- for plausible deniability if things go sideways.

(and then this next heretofore unknown fact gets the police into the frame)

The police Gang Intelligence Unit knows there's to be an initiation event -- but not the precise nature of the event -- and they know the identity of the recruit. So the officers on the street now have a photo and a name.

(This also means there's a mole in the gang. A possibly useful hook into the future. Maybe even someone protecting the victim. Or even protecting the recruit. Lots of fertile juice in there.)

And then, rather than abduct the victim, the recruit chickens-out the last minute and ends up assisting the victim in some problem they've encountered on the street. Or maybe even the recruit finds they know the victim, causing the change in plans. (I really like this one better. It's an awesome hook into a future.)

(now we have the recruit and the would-be victim alone together, so we can just bump them into the on-the-alert police. They must have wheels, the gang would not expect the recruit to be walking to the meet with the victim in tow.)

As the recruit drives away, giving the would-be victim a lift, there's a moving violation or some other situation -- an accident or something -- on the drive. While waiting to get moving again, an officer interacts with them, and hey, doesn't that face look familiar? What was that GIU alert during the shift's briefing?

The recruit and the victim, are now square in the police's clutches without the rest of the gang.

Now, what's been broken?

Since there's been no crime, there's no testimony. (We aren't yet jacked into "Minority Report" PreCrime tools) But that aspect was hosed at the get go, anyway, when the recruit chickened out and the victim wasn't harmed. No harm, no foul, no arrest. The recruit is not even a gang member, so they can't be hassled for that, either.

But the police have them. Where's the squeeze? The GIU informant... Will they give it up? Or does the GIU want to keep things in place, going for their always-bigger fish? Now we have the police and GIU in the lovely snarl, too.

What was the testimony going to cause? Push there?

What was the GIU informant's motivation for the leak? Push there?

Good luck!
 

ironpony

Senior Member
Thanks for the suggestion, that's actually interesting! Actually, the way I have the story, I don't want the police to know who the new recruit is, because if they know who it is, the plot would go in a very different direction than I intended. But maybe the police could know another one of them instead? Also, the way I wanted it to go, I wanted the gang to video-record the new recruit committing the crime, because they use this as leverage and blackmail on him later, in order for the plot to go where I want. So they would have to have more members around in order to videorecord him doing it, or at least one more. But I don't want the police discovering that recording until later on in the plot.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top