"The Kent family was taken by representatives of a foreign agency whose information was hopelessly compromised," Lois said.
"But surely ... as soon as the mistake was realised ..."
"By then, the Kents had been removed from the United States." Lois pushed her hands into the pockets of her jacket. "My agency has been working to locate them and negotiate their return."
"It took *seven* years?"
"Very few rogue agencies are willing to admit to mistakes," Lois said grimly. "Even fewer are willing to make restitution."
"So you kidnapped him back?" the male cop asked incredulously.
I said in my previous feedback that I'd have to wait and see the details to know how I felt about Lois's cover story. Now, having seen them, I have to say ... OK, I'm sold.
Given what Clark has gone through, this is probably the most logical solution you/Lois could come up with. You can't just have Clark and his mother off on a 7 year vacation or leading any type of a normal life elsewhere because there is no way to hide the trauma that Clark (and likely Martha) have gone through. And this is a pretty clever way to work around that. The old adage about "the best lie is one close to the truth" certainly applies here -- Clark was kidnapped, he was held prisoner, he got separated from his parents, it took seven years to free him, and now he's back but with a lot of baggage. All true. The only thing that is made up is who kidnapped him and why.
And who is going to push if Clark looks distressed and says, "I don't want to talk about those years," in response to any questions? Speculation might run rampant for awhile, but everyone will assume that it was pretty bad and give him the time and space he needs. Like with a soldier coming back from war after being captured, it would be the ultimate social faux pas to push for details.
So congrats to you for, as expected, once again impressing me with your plotting prowess.
Kathy
