I'd think so...
LOIS is the kidnap victim. For all anyone knows, it could have been... um... throes of passion or something
. Lois being gone INDICATES the possibility of kidnapping but doesn't necessarily PROVE it [at least according to the million crime procedurals I've watched
]. Heck, MAYBE Clark was trying to get Lois to stay and she fought him, knocked him out escaped and he followed her - he just wanted to talk
[which would still be trespassing I'd think].
And the DA would have to agree to press charges as well. They could tell Deter/et al to stick it [but more politely
]. It's up to the DA what to prosecute and what not to.
They could possibly file a civil suit wanting Clark [IF it's proven Clark was there - we don't know what evidence there is that he was - all we have is the headline which doesn't SAY what evidence they have that Clark took her, for all we know at this point it's pure supposition] to pay for damages and repairs but criminal cases are up to the DA. They only charge someone with murder or whatever IF the DA believes there is enough evidence to convict [okay sometimes they go to trial with less but not too often].
IF Lois says there was no kidnapping there isn't [though, as ML said, if they could PROVE she's lying there would be possible consequences for perjury or lying in a sworn statement or whatever you call it, but I doubt Henderson/etc would pursue it much once ML gives us the happy ending =D].
Edit: As ML said, there are some 'zero tolerance' type things that will be automatic, but the less evidence, the less chance they will on anything else.
