Chapter 17 - The criminal trial begins
Drusilla went to trial eight months after the hose incident.
Elowen did not sit through proceedings.
Her forensic interview could not simply replace confrontation requirements automatically; court made admissibility decisions and she may have to testify? At five, avoid unless necessary. Prosecutors relied more on video for Elowen incident and other child witnesses with accommodations. Elowen’s direct testimony was avoided under applicable child-witness protections because park video/witnesses covered key facts? Let's keep generic: judge allowed limited child testimony through protective procedure only on necessary facts? Better not overcomplicate.
Caleb testified briefly.
Eight.
He said:
“Mrs. Carter told me reset time.”
“Could you leave?”
“No.”
“How do you know?”
“I tried.”
“Was door locked?”
“Yes.”
“Did you ask out?”
“Yes.”
Then defense:
“Did your mom tell Mrs. Carter she could give consequences?”
“I don’t know.”
Good.
No child interpreting contracts.
Then camera.
Strong.
Josie’s clip.
Strong.
Then Elowen park video.
Drusilla’s own camera showed hose.
Not high enough quality to show pressure precisely, but she admitted spraying.
Witness saw fall.
Then my kick.
Also video.
Defense used it.
“Mr. Carter was violent too.”
I testified:
“Yes.”
“Charged?”
“Yes.”
“Diversion?”
“Yes.”
No hiding.
Then:
“Did you hate Drusilla after?”
“Yes.”
“Do you want her convicted?”
“I want the court to decide from evidence.”
Good.
Then business.
Prosecution introduced only what established knowledge/intent, not every spreadsheet line.
Padlock use.
Concealment from parents.
Staged methods.
No need inflame with money unless relevant.
The $2,900 projected trust reimbursement was not part of criminal confinement charges.
Family court.
May you like
Separate.
That distinction kept story grounded.
