Chapter 13 - THERESA’S LAWYER CALLS IT DISCIPLINE
The criminal defense narrowed everything.
Six minutes.
No physical injury beyond knee bruises.
Kennel large enough for Nora to sit and move.
Door visible.
Theresa present nearby.
No abandonment.
No food deprivation.
No repeated confinement proved.
Then intent.
“Time-out.”
The prosecutor responded:
“A locked animal kennel.”
Defense:
“Location does not change duration.”
Prosecution:
“Location changes humiliation and safety.”
Both sides had arguments.
Then the shoe statement.
Defense called it sarcasm.
Maybe.
Then Nora’s prior sitting beside the kennel.
Not confinement.
Context only.
Then the care plan.
Defense wanted it excluded from criminal trial unless directly relevant.
Likely partly.
Civil proceedings could address broader control.
Criminal law would remain focused.
Good.
No giant theory needed.
Theresa had restrained a five-year-old in an animal kennel to punish her for defiance.
That was enough.
Then Audrey asked:
“Will Nora testify?”
Prosecutor hoped not.
Video.
Adult witnesses.
Recorded forensic interview subject to admissibility rules.
May you like
The goal was not to make a child relive six minutes because adults wanted emotional impact.
Good.
