age was secretly confined against her will during that time frame however the overwhelming evidence at trial showed that during that time frame ages exact whereabouts was known by multiple public  in this case because of the unique facts and people versus past the defendant i'm sure his landlord ran next door took a hostage took a woman hostage and the woman's sister immediately alerted a neighbor that her sister with me and held in can find the story with climate because and i felt many people were quite aware that the sister resume strayed in the apartment and the fact that no one to rescue her because of the half the situation did not convert that which was otherwise well that she knew it was living with her grandmother and she had the address and the phone numbers she said that she passed that information on to a case stacey jillian stacey could not have been keeping pages location and her grandmother's house a secret from her when the phyllis are the ones who daily the address and location in phone number two  wisconsin the girls in the past they have two thousand and fourteen and he agreed to move back to the house and take care of the day to day care of the child to bring her to and from school agree to pay the bills faster and i think it was about january of two thousand and fifteen holding us there was some dispute he didn't he stopped paying the bills and  then around february early february of two thousand and fifteen and yes at this point she's actually about eight months pregnant because it's the middle of february the middle winner she's walking the child child goes to stay grandma around february six and mid february mandy's hears from another cousin and some potential allegations of abuse of inappropriate touching and is at her grandmother's house she's no longer with me she's out of their mother's house here's the address here is the contact information here's the phone number they also made the child's school aware of where the child was staying so that custody order is valid least the child there was nothing she could do to please the child so for those reasons between march th and march th she did not have physical custody of the child she was it would be it had been illegal is well he seems to agree that the cousin told me that there was touching and if he's and say oh i don't really i think i really didn't understand that h daughter to the west side chicago to be closer to school these defendants decided that they were going to keep age with them no matter what it took and even though mr hurd went back to that house more than eight times with the police he searched better school he went to two different court houses and filed a missing persons report and even the defendants knew he was making ever peace efforts to get his daughter back these defendants never he he knew she was at school right no your honor the record is not indicate that and this brings us to on the other school mr hurd knew that his daughter had been taken from him and he was searching for her anywhere that she might be put in her that was in the record with respect to her you know what i would call usual attendance at school should be disregarded as relevant as relates to the represented and that the crew was asking about quiana the twelve year old cousin when the courts respond to question jackson because i was asking whether or not she had gone and ever asked age and defendant jackson testified yes i did and then the court asked her rep did she say and after a pause defendant jackson's just replied that he touched her so there's a little bit of a misconstruction of the record there with respect to who is being talk testimony the circuit court was the one sitting there observing these witnesses and as for the circuit court to exercise its judgment of the credibility and the weight and as the judge explained he did not find jackson's testimony to that point particularly convincing as giving rise to a reasonable belief that her allegation that not just you know my cousin said somebody touched my other cousin but that the allegation of child sexual abuse was reasonably that she had been abused a reasonable trier of fact could find from that evidence that there was not a reasonable basis for the defendants to believe that they were reporting to d c fs the state's not saying that people should not report these things they should if there is a reasonable basis to do so as not of the defendants did here turning back to the issue of the kidnapping though even if the script is declining to accept that it's the paper liable to be affected by the taking that is relevant for the inquiry and we want to look at the broader public this people started to prove to kidnapping beyond a reasonable doubt and we're a case law is very clear that the secrecy element contact and the cases that discuss this notice to whether or not from the circumstances present the public would understand that this person had was being held against their will and that i know that person callous or ill in their priest potentially distinguished automobile cases on the idea of a moving st fixed location but the feelings of those cases make clear that just because a person is present in the public sphere does not mean that they're not being that the mother the parents ross the child she was taken by the defendant and the defendant took a number of steps to make it appear to everyone else looking in that this was a normal situation that was going on the she was knew where that child was it was it shouldn't take it just the difference between a baby a seven year old girl yes there are some differences between a seven year old and a baby however there's differences aren't so great as relevant your honor however what's also relevant is the attendant circumstances of the kidnapping and that is what we look at here for whether or not this person was secretly confined and here it's unlikely that even age realised that she had been taken she was seven years or jackson was her room or caretaker stacy regularly took care of her as well she regularly saw her grandmother so to her even this was a normal situation for f she understood and she seven years old she's not just suddenly deciding to live it rolls this out she's not able to just decide i'm going to leave she's a seven year old and she doesn't realise that she's been taken against her father's will is being held at a place where he doesn't know where she is against his will that is a secret confinement and even though the defense we're communicating to the school in d c fs we have her with us she's staying here now tests the standard of whether the evidence is so insidious factory has to prove all the elements of the offenses charge i mean it's just you got a lot of factors here that just under  that is correct yeah the grandmother and then stacy from march th to march th was even in the state is that correct that was her testimony that she was not in the state we know that she was in the state on at least the th and th we have the testimony from age that throughout this time period of federer six to the th she's regularly seen both of her sisters and we also have the testimony of detective jurists who testified that stacy represent her yes and yes my sister doing this together we have her and a recent reference could be drawn that she was present at least some time and even if she wasn't she was directly involved throughout this process it so you're relying on in some instances it may be more effective for a defendant to hide a victim of kidnapping in plain view which is where the people contended occurred here these defendants created a situation and an impression to the general public that the child was properly with them this is normal there's a thing with the dad but this is ok and for the public was aware there was a custody thing going on there's a dispute the parent was not aware that they had taken the rebel states at the school is not allowed to have mr have contact with age that doesn't mean school is aware that outside the school he was also being denied access and doesn't the school is aware that she had been taken away from him against his will finder could find that those facts prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this was a kidnapping how how does it figure in this and the th they think it was that mrs wilson was that because of the c f s investigation or was it because it gramma or was it because of the defendant it was because a defendant said we have mr bates testimony that after court on the th not only did ask for the child back in for your honor there's no evidence in the record as to specifically when the investigation deems the allegations unfounded we know there was a home visit on the th in anticipation she would be returning there that that would be  with us throughout the period of march th until february th until march th she specifically said we're keeping her with us and away from her and taking these facts together the fact that she knows about the order denied access does not convert something into a secret also the state mentioned that the defendants create a sneer i said that the child is properly with the defendants how can that be if on the very day