Chapter 15 - Victoria’s preliminary hearing
The prosecution did not put Lily through repeated testimony immediately.
Her forensic interview was preserved.
At the preliminary hearing, the state used:
Carmen.
Dr. Carter.
Toxicology expert.
Detective Grant.
Owen? No pawn broker here. Different story. Need no cross-story leakage. Good.
Digital evidence.
The court found probable cause for:
Child endangerment/abuse.
Unauthorized administration of medication.
Tampering with medical equipment.
One assault/restraint-related count.
Attempted fraud tied to care-plan proposal was also allowed forward, though judge noted evidence was more circumstantial on financial intent.
Victoria’s defense attacked causation.
Could syringe have belonged to hospital staff?
Possible theoretically.
But location.
No order.
Lily’s account.
Victoria access.
Could Lily have placed it there?
Defense did not strongly push that.
Bad look.
Then restraint marks.
Victoria admitted using soft ties.
Her claim:
Lily was trying to pull IV out and hospital staff were slow to respond.
If she believed emergency, why not press call button?
She said:
“I panicked.”
Then IV tubing.
She claimed she was unkinking.
Then medication.
She said a subcontracted nurse had previously told her medication could be used during severe panic.
No written order.
No prescription for Lily.
Nurse denied.
Then financial motive.
Her lawyer argued:
Victoria would earn at most $96,000 management revenue, with real work and costs.
“No rational person risks prison for that.”
Prosecutor answered:
“People risk prison for less.”
Not proof.
Then the phrase:
“The sicker you are, the more valuable you are to me.”
Only me and Lily heard.
Two witnesses.
Defense said Lily repeated my wording after hearing me tell police.
Forensic timeline mattered.
Lily told Megan the phrase after I had already reported it.
Could contamination occur?
Possibly.
But Lily had independently told a nursing assistant before I arrived:
“Vicky gets mad when I feel better.”
Corroboration.
Then Dr. Carter described room.
No dramatics.
Then the judge bound charges over.
Trial set four months later.
No conviction.
Then Victoria’s bail conditions:
No contact with Lily.
No pediatric-care work involving medication or unsupervised children while case pending.
Could court impose broad work restriction? Limited, yes if related.
Lang Family Care removed her from direct client duties.
Jenna became interim manager.
Business continued.
No instant collapse.
Then Victoria sued Lang Family Care? She owned it. Maybe employment? No.
Her investors? She owned 80%, small partner 20%. Let's establish no need.
The company still had other clients.
Some left.
Revenue declined.
Not zero.
Then Commonwealth terminated its contract for cause.
Disputed.
May you like
That became a civil arbitration.
Active conflict.
