Chapter 10 - LINDA UNDER OATH
Linda’s criminal case moved more slowly after the charges were filed.
My divorce case did not.
Three weeks after the incident, Evelyn scheduled depositions connected to the custody dispute and related civil protective matters.
Linda’s criminal attorney fought to limit her testimony.
He was right to do that.
Anything Linda said in a family-law deposition could affect the criminal case.
The judge allowed a narrow deposition focused on contact with Ellie, prior behavior, and statements already made publicly or to third parties.
Linda appeared by video from her attorney’s conference room.
I watched from Evelyn’s office.
She looked older than she had three weeks earlier.
Her hair was neatly styled.
Her blouse was pale blue.
She wore a small cross necklace I had seen her wear only at weddings and funerals.
I noticed that detail and hated myself for noticing it.
Evelyn began with ordinary questions.
Name.
Address.
Relationship to Ellie.
Frequency of family visits.
Linda answered calmly.
Then Evelyn asked about the blue cup.
Linda’s mouth tightened.
“Cole had a special cup.”
“Why was it special?”
“He liked it.”
“Was anyone else allowed to touch it?”
“It was his cup.”
“That was not my question.”
Linda’s attorney objected to tone.
Evelyn rephrased.
“Had you previously asked Claire to prevent Ellie from touching Cole’s cup?”
“Yes.”
“How many times?”
“I don’t know.”
“More than once?”
“Yes.”
“More than five times?”
“I don’t know.”
Evelyn displayed one of Linda’s messages on the screen.
I know she is little but she is old enough to stop touching everything.
“Did you write this?”
“Yes.”
“Who does ‘she’ refer to?”
“Ellie.”
“How old was Ellie?”
“I don’t remember.”
“Approximately twenty-two months?”
“If you say so.”
Evelyn did not react.
She displayed the cracker message.
Today it is a cracker.
Later it will be whatever Cole is holding.
“Did you write this?”
“Yes.”
“What did you mean?”
“That Claire needed to teach boundaries.”
“To a child under two?”
“To a child old enough to learn.”
I felt anger rise.
Evelyn’s hand moved slightly toward me without looking away from the screen.
Stay still.
I did.
“Did you believe Ellie presented a safety risk to Cole?”
Linda hesitated.
“I believed she was rough.”
“Give an example.”
“She grabbed things.”
“From Cole?”
“Yes.”
“What things?”
“Toys.”
“Food.”
“His cup.”
“Did Ellie ever strike Cole?”
“No.”
“Push him down?”
“Not that I remember.”
“Bite him?”
“No.”
“Throw an object at him?”
“No.”
“So when you told police Ellie’s behavior around Cole had become unsafe, what specific unsafe conduct were you describing?”
Linda’s attorney objected.
Linda answered anyway.
“She did not respect boundaries.”
Evelyn let the silence sit.
Then she changed topics.
“On Sunday, did Ellie reach for Cole’s cup?”
“Yes.”
“Did you stand up?”
Linda looked toward her attorney.
He instructed her not to answer questions about the charged incident beyond statements already made.
Evelyn nodded.
“Did you tell paramedics you flinched?”
Linda’s attorney objected again but allowed the question because the statement had already been disclosed.
“Yes.”
“Did you tell your son later that you stood to move the cup away from Ellie?”
Linda went still.
Her attorney leaned toward her.
They whispered off microphone.
Then Linda answered.
“I may have said that.”
“Which is true?”
“I don’t understand.”
“Did you stand because you were startled, or did you stand because you intended to move something away from Ellie?”
“That is asking about the incident.”
Her attorney objected.
Evelyn nodded.
“I will withdraw.”
She did not need the answer.
The contradiction had already been placed on the record.
Next came the gate visit.
“Were you served with a temporary protective order before arriving at Thomas Mercer’s property?”
“I did not understand it.”
“That was not my question.”
“I received something on my phone.”
“Did you open it?”
“Yes.”
“Did it say you were not to contact Claire or Ellie?”
“I was upset.”
“Did it say that?”
Linda looked directly into the camera.
“Yes.”
“Why did you go to the property?”
“I wanted to apologize.”
I felt my fingers curl around the edge of the table.
Evelyn displayed the gate-camera transcript.
Tell Claire I brought Ellie the cup she wanted so badly.
“Was that your apology?”
Linda’s face flushed.
“I was emotional.”
“Were you angry?”
“Yes.”
“At whom?”
“Claire.”
“Why?”
“Because she was turning everyone against me.”
I nearly spoke.
Evelyn’s hand moved again.
I stayed silent.
“Did you believe Claire should have kept the matter inside the family?”
“Yes.”
“Did you tell her that?”
“I sent a message.”
“A message telling her to think very carefully before letting outsiders misunderstand a private family matter?”
Linda looked at her attorney.
“Yes.”
“Were the paramedics outsiders?”
Objection.
“Were hospital staff outsiders?”
Objection.
“Were police outsiders?”
Objection.
Evelyn stopped.
The point had already landed.
After a short break, Gary’s deposition began.
Unlike Linda, he was not facing the child-abuse charge.
His attorney still limited him carefully because of the video-access investigation.
Gary entered the room with the confidence of a man accustomed to controlling meetings.
That confidence lasted twelve minutes.
Evelyn started with the Keep Calm group.
“Did you create this chat?”
“Yes.”
“Why?”
“To prevent confusion.”
“Why did you tell everyone not to use the word threw?”
“Because no one knew what happened.”
“Did you see what happened?”
“Parts of it.”
“Where were you standing?”
“Near the dining table.”
“Was your view obstructed?”
“Partially.”
“By what?”
He hesitated.
“People.”
“Which people?”
“I don’t remember.”
Evelyn displayed a still from my video.
Gary was visible in the background.
Between him and Linda there was empty tile.
No person blocked his view.
“Is that you?”
“Yes.”
“Who is obstructing your view in this frame?”
Gary leaned closer.
“The camera angle is deceptive.”
“That was not my question.”
His jaw tightened.
“No one.”
“Did you tell the paramedic Ellie lunged?”
“I may have used that word.”
“Why?”
“That is how I remembered it.”
“Did you see Ellie’s feet leave the floor?”
“No.”
“Did you see her body move suddenly forward?”
“I saw her reach.”
“Then why use the word lunged?”
Gary’s attorney objected.
Gary answered anyway.
“Because everyone was upset.”
Evelyn waited.
“So emotion changed the word reach into lunge?”
Another objection.
Then came the computer.
“Did you enter Ben and Claire’s home Sunday night?”
Gary’s lawyer instructed him to invoke his right not to answer based on the pending investigation.
“Did you access their computer?”
Same instruction.
“Did you download the video?”
Same instruction.
“Did you provide a copy to Dana?”
Same instruction.
“Did you create or assist in creating an edited clip?”
Same instruction.
I watched Gary invoke his rights five times.
There was nothing improper about doing so.
Evelyn had warned me not to treat constitutional rights as admissions.
Still, the contrast was impossible to miss.
The man who had spent days saying everyone needed clarity suddenly had very little to say under oath.
At the end, Evelyn asked one final question unrelated to the computer.
“Did you ask Ben to sign a statement saying his view of Linda’s arm was obstructed?”
Gary’s attorney tried to object.
The judge’s prior order allowed the question because it concerned witness pressure in the custody matter.
Gary answered.
“I gave my son a draft statement.”
“Who wrote it?”
“My attorney.”
“Which attorney?”
“My personal attorney.”
“Was the statement true?”
Gary looked into the camera.
“It reflected uncertainty.”
“That was not my question.”
He leaned back.
“Truth is not always as simple as a video makes it look.”
Evelyn did not blink.
“No further questions.”
The deposition ended.
I should have felt triumphant.
Instead, I felt tired.
Then Evelyn’s assistant entered the room with a printed email.
It had come from Aaron’s attorney.
Aaron wanted to amend his testimony again.
This time, he did not want to say he had been mistaken.
He wanted to speak to Detective Ruiz in person.
May you like
And he wanted Dana nowhere near the room when he did.
