Chapter 15 - SOPHRONIA’S CHILD CASE
Sophronia’s case was clearer.
She intentionally struck a five-year-old.
Video.
Witnesses.
Bruising.
Then kicked the child’s toy.
The toy damage itself was minor.
The slap mattered most.
Why did she do it?
She said:
“I lost my temper.”
Then:
“Aurelia was shouting.”
Video showed Aurelia saying:
“Grandpa made it for me.”
Not shouting much.
Then Sophronia admitted:
“I was already angry about the estate.”
There.
A child became the target for adult resentment.
The prosecutor offered a misdemeanor child-battery disposition.
No serious injury.
No prior criminal record.
Plea.
Probation.
Anger-management.
Family-boundary counseling.
Restitution for medical costs.
No direct contact with Aurelia for a defined period unless later approved through therapist-guided process.
Sophronia initially wanted diversion.
Prosecutor declined because intentional strike against a young child was captured clearly and followed a verbal degradation.
Negotiations continued.
Then child protection assessed my home too.
Because Aurelia had witnessed me retaliate.
They asked:
Do I hit her?
No.
Physical discipline?
No.
Throw things?
No.
Was Christmas retaliation isolated?
Yes, according to available information.
No removal concern.
They recommended I continue anger work.
May you like
Fine.
No parent gets automatic saint status because another adult did worse.
