Go Back   WritersBeat.com > Writing Craft > Writing Help & Issues

Writing Help & Issues You name it, we solve it! Ask your questions here.

Does this ending have to be explained to the reader in order to be understood?

Thread Tools
Old 07-29-2016, 02:18 AM
ironpony (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 162
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Does this ending have to be explained to the reader in order to be understood?

For my script, it's about a cop who wants to bring down a gang of criminals, even breaking the law and do it on his own himself, to try to do it successfully.

However, when writing it, I kept facing too problems. If he is acting on his own, how is he suppose to be bring in any evidence, without it becoming fruit of the poisonous tree? Since he is acting on his own, without search or wire tap warrants, he cannot bring any evidence, that would be admissible in court.

Another problem I had is that I wanted the MC to bring the villains down all at once, without having to one, than the other, than the other, etc. Cause then it would look too suspicious and get too complicated, to the police, cause there is only so much he can get away with, and the villains would be less able to be taken by surprise at that point. It just creates more complications.

Basically I did some research and sat down with a real police officer, and came up with an ending that I think would work, at least well enough, but I am not sure if the reader will understand it.

Basically in order for evidence to be accepted without being fruit of the poisonous tree, there is one thing that the MC could do. He can tail and spy on the villains until he sees one of the villains go to a certain place. After the villain leaves, the MC then breaks into that place and finds incriminating evidence on all the villains.

Basically the main leader of the gang of villains has collateral on each of the members by video-recording each one of their blood ins. A blood in, is when a gang recruits a new member, that member has to spill the blood of another person, to prove they are reliable, but also to prove that they are not undercover cops.

He then takes all of the videorecordings on all of them, with him. He then arranges for the villains to all be in the same place at the same time, through baiting and manipulating them with his own little sting operation. He then goes to where they are and breaks into the building, but without making much noise, so they won't notice.

He then leaves the video recordings in plain view, where he broke in. He gets an ally of his to make an anonymous call to the police. The caller then tips the police by reporting a break in that just happened, and that there are video recordings in plain view at the entrance of the place, that was broken into. The caller tells the police that on these recordings are the blood ins of all the gang members, that were recorded for having collateral on each one of them.

The police then go to the scene, find the break in, and sees the recordings in plain view. They call their superiors, who then call the prosecutor and a judge to get a warrant to obtain them, based on the callers specifics.

The caller then calls back and tells the police that the gang members who are on that video are also close by in the same building. The gang members shortly later begin to leave, only to discover that the place has been broken into, with the blood in recordings right there, and the police right there waiting for a warrant as well. So this is what the MC was hoping for, to get evidence on them that will not be fruit of the poisonous tree, but also to get all the villains discovered by the police all at once.

However, do I need to explain to the audience by one character explaining it to another, why the MC decides to catch the villains this specific way, with the legal technicalities, of the evidence needing to be reported by someone, other than a cop, or someone related to a cop that is on the case, which is why it has to be anonymous...or that it has to be in plain view, etc.

Or do most viewers understand how the fruit of the poisonous tree thing works, and they will understand why the MC chooses this specific plan?

Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2016, 05:47 AM
nomadreid's Avatar
nomadreid (Offline)
Official Member
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Haifa, Israel
Posts: 53
Thanks: 12
Thanks 3

You will need an explanation, although it shouldn't be too detailed or you will bore the reader. Readers will understand through brief references that there is a problem obtaining evidence in an illegal way -- that is standard detective fare, but the reader needs to be briefly reminded of it. By the way, you don't need one character explain it to the other; the detective himself can have thoughts about it "Can't do it that way, not legal evidence", or even a police officer who was in on it, "Well done. The court will accept this evidence."
Reply With Quote

  WritersBeat.com > Writing Craft > Writing Help & Issues

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Christdolou Gambit/Double Standard richards89 Fiction 3 06-07-2011 05:02 PM
"Delivery Driver" ShrewdSpirit Fiction 1 01-20-2011 09:17 AM
Show vs. Tell Devon General Writing 0 02-06-2009 11:33 AM
The Creation of Perception (Point of View) Devon General Writing 0 11-20-2008 01:24 AM
Contest Results | Fiction | Flash (March 2007) Icarus Previous Contests 19 04-05-2007 05:16 PM

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:26 AM.

vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.