Creek was charged with the crime of kidnapping a child. During the entire kidnapping the child, Adam, remained asleep. Under relevant state tort law, Adam could not recover damages from Creek for thr tort of false imprisonment, because to do so, a victim must be conscious during the imprisonment. Creek contented that because he could not be held liable for the tort of false imprisonment, he could not be guilty of kidnapping where the victim was asleep and unconscious. Was he correct? Are the goals of tort law and criminal law the same? should different goals produce different results here?